illlii]  ,41111 


ill 


.<rtiii 


?H 


m 


GIFT  OF 

SEELEY  W.  MUDD 

and 

GEORGE  I.  COCHRAN    MEYER  ELSASSER 

DR.JOHNR.  HAYNES    WILLIAM  L.  HONNOLD 

JAMES  R.  MARTIN         MRS.  JOSEPH  F.  SARTOR! 

to  the 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

SOUTHERN  BRANCH 


1  Ills      U«JU1V     13      i-'«_'i 


ivUG  5      1929 

OCT  2  4  1923 

2  9  ,ri:k 

JAN  5    mi 

.JAN  3  0  -iBm 


JUWl 


mv  5    19^7 


Form  L-9-15m-8,'26 


n 


ESSAYS 

Practical  and  Speculative 


BY  THE  SAME  AU'. 

TEOR 

[lurch. 

Eighth 

History  of  the  American  Episcopal  C 

edition,  illustrated.     8vo,  cloth. 

- 

$2.00. 

A  Year's  Sermons.     12mo,  cloth, 

- 

$1.25. 

Sons  of  God.     A  series  of  Sermons. 

12mo, 

paper. 

50  cents.     Cloth, 

- 

$1.25. 

Sermon  Stuff.     First  series.     12mo, 

cloth. 

$1.00. 

Sermon  Stuff.     Second  Series.     12n 

10,  cloth,  $1.00. 

Publisher 

THOMAS  WHITTAKER, 

2  &  3  BIBLE  HOUSE,  NEW  YORK 

ESSAYS 


Practical  and  Speculative 


BY 


S.  D.  McCONNELL,  D.D.,  D.C.L. 


NEW  YORK 
THOMAS  WHITTAKER 

2  AND  3  BIBLE  HOUSE 
1900 


Copyright,  1900 
By  THOMAS  WHITTAKER 


3  L50 


TO  MY  GOOD  OLD  FRIEND 

ROBERT  W.  GRANGE,  D.  D., 

THIS  LITTLE  BOOK 


Note. — I  hereby  make  my  sincere  acknowledgment  to  the  New 
World,  the  Churchman  and  the  Outlook  for  their  courteous  permission 
to  reprint  portions  of  this  little  volume  which  have  already  appeared 
in  their  pages. 


Contents 


S 


M 
en 


I.   THE  MORALS  OF  SEX     . 
II.   CHURCH   AND   CLERGY 

III.  ABOUT  THEOLOGICAL  SEMI2^ARIES 

IV.  BROAD  CHURCHMElSr,  AND  NARROW 
V.   THE  NEXT  STEP  IN  CHRISTIANITY 

TI.   SCRIPTURE,  INSPIRATION  AND  AUTHORITY, 
VII.   THE  FALL, — UPWARD 
VIII.   THE  ROLE  OF  BELIEF 
IX.   GOD,  EVEN  OUR  GOD 
X.   THE  NEW  SITUATION 
XI.   NATURE  AND  GOD 
XII.   EVOLUTION  AND  GOD 

XIII.  GOD  MANIFEST       . 

XIV.  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  CROSS 
XV.   THE  OTHER  LIFE 

XVI.   THE  HOLY  CATHOLIC  CHURCH 


7 

33 

53 

75 

89 

107 

125 

147 

155 

169 

181 

191 

209 

233 

255 

273 


THE  MORALS  OF  SEX 


THE  MORALS   OP  SEX 

Of  all  the  Commandments  in  the  Decalogue,  the 
most  difficult  to  enforce  and  expound  is  the  Seventh. 
For  the  present  purpose  it  is  its  exposition  with  which 
I  am  concerned,  and  it  is  the  clergy  chiefly  that  I  have 
in  mind  in  what  I  say.  There  are  at  least  three  rea- 
sons which  make  a  discussion  of  the  Law  of  Sexual 
Morality  pertinent  to  us  professionally.  Firsts  as  offi- 
cial teachers  of  righteousness  and  ministers  of  disci- 
pline we  are  continually  called  upon  to  apply  and  in- 
terpret the  law.  Second^  we  are  confronted  with  a  new 
social  and  economic  order  which  has  introduced  into  this 
region  of  morals  quite  new  and  very  profound  difficul- 
ties. Thirds  in  common  with  Protestantism  generally, 
our  Church  is  engaged  in  the  attempt  to  formulate  the 
law  of  the  case  in  a  Canon  of  Marriage  and  Divorce. 
These  three  reasons  may  also  serve  as  the  headings 
for  the  divisions  of  what  is  rather  a  memorandum  for 
an  argument  than  a  symmetrical  thesis. 

I.  What,  then,  is  God's  law  as  to  sex  relation- 
ships ?  Upon  what  sanction,  human  or  divine,  does 
the  law  rest  ?  Is  the  same  law  binding  upon  men. 
and  women  ? 

To  these  questions  the  Social  Purity  League  would 

9 


10  THE   MORALS    OF   SEX 

give  one  answer.  The  average  practicing  physician 
would  give  another.  The  law  of  the  state  is  based 
upon  ideas  differing  from  both  replies.  The  Church 
gives  an  answer  differing  somewhat  from  all  of  them. 
"What  is  the  actual  will  of  God  and  the  will  of  Nature 
on  the  subject?  We  may  be  certain  that  the  two 
wills  will  coincide.  Usually  if  we  can  find  out  pre- 
cisely in  any  case  what  l^ature  wishes  we  may  be 
quite  sure  that  we  have  found  out  what  is  the  will  of 
God  in  that  case.  For  Nature  is  God's  way  of  ex- 
pressing Himself. 

But  in  the  case  of  sex  relationships  it  may  as  well 
be  confessed  that  Nature  does  not  seem  to  know  her 
own  mind.  This  is  the  origin  of  the  whole  moral  con- 
fusion upon  the  subject.  In  regard  to  other  appetites 
and  desires  Nature  is  a  trustworthy  guide.  Their 
existence  is  jprima  facie  proof  of  their  innocence. 
They  are  warnings  of  needs.  They  protect  them- 
selves against  abuse  by  the  sense  of  satiety.  For 
other  moral  prohibitions  the  reason  is  so  evident  in 
the  nature  of  things  that  the  understanding  is  ready 
to  uphold  the  conscience  in  its  mandates.  But  in  the 
case  before  us  we  cannot  "follow  the  guidance  of 
Nature."  The  instant  that  proposal  is  baldly  made, 
all  men  see  that  it  will  not  work.  As  a  social  rule,  it 
is  condemned  by  the  practically  unanimous  vote  of  so- 
ciety. And  it  is  not  civilized  and  Christian  society 
alone  which  condemns  it.  Unregulated  intercourse  at 
will   is   not   permitted  even  by  the  lowest  savages. 


THE   MORALS   OF   SEX  11 

Among  the  lower  animals  it  is  not  possible.  In  men 
it  is  physically  possible,  but  it  is  limited  and  regulated 
by  social  conventions.  These  limitations  have  the 
force  of  law,  and  are  maintained  by  an  appeal  to  re- 
ligion.    AYhat  then  are  they,  and  ought  they  to  be  ? 

The  first  prohibition  is  of  Adultery.  What  is 
adultery?  The  legal  definition  is  slightly  different, 
but  the  practical  definition  is :  sexual  connection  with 
another  man's  wife.  In  what  does  the  wrong  of  the 
action  consist  ?  The  first  answer  is,  it  is  a  wrong  to 
the  woman's  husband.  This  is  the  view  which  the  law 
takes  of  the  matter.  This  was  the  view  of  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures.  The  adulterer  w^as  punished  as 
a  thief.  He  had  trespassed  upon  another  man's  prop- 
erty. This  is  the  Common  Law  doctrine  to  this  day 
in  Europe  and  America.  The  remedy  for  the  "  injured 
husband," — the  phrase  is  significant, — is  sought  by  an 
action  to  recover  damages.  Underlying  it  is  the  feel- 
ing surviving  from  ancient  times  that  a  wife  is  prop- 
erty. In  quite  modern  practice  has  been  introduced 
a  legal  fiction  to  put  the  wife  on  the  same  legal  stand- 
ing as  the  husband,  and  she  has  been  allowed  also  to 
sue  for  damages  for  "  the  alienation  of  the  husband's 
affections."  Courts  and  juries  have  always  found  it 
difficult,  however,  to  assess  the  value  of  the  thing- 
sought  to  be  recovered. 

But  the  punishment  of  the  adulteress  has  always 
been  reached  on  other  grounds.  Her  offence  has  been 
estimated    not    by   the    damage   inflicted   upon   the 


12  THE   MORALS    OF   SEX 

wronged  husband,  but  by  the  damage  she  has  done  to 
society.  She  has  "  defiled  the  blood."  Where  so- 
ciety was  organized,  as  in  Israel,  about  the  tribal 
principle,  it  is  easy  to  see  why  she  was  so  sternly 
dealt  with  for  having  "  wrought  confusion  "  in  Israel. 
But  the  same  quality  must  always  distinguish  the 
adulteress  from  the  adulterer.  The  husband  may 
wander  among  harlots,  and  in  the  view  of  law,  the 
wrong  which  he  does  and  which  he  incurs  is  personal 
to  himself.  But  for  the  wife  to  admit  an  intruder  is 
to  confuse  tlie  inheritance.  Her  offence  is  against 
her  father,  her  husband's  father,  her  children,  against 
the  State.  It  vitiates,  or  at  any  rate  renders  uncertain, 
the  testaments  of  all  who  have  preceded  her  and  her 
husband.  In  the  sin  of  adultery  the  same  judgment 
has  never  been  meted  to  the  man  and  the  woman,  and 
never  can  be.  The  implications  of  this  we  will  meet 
again  when  we  come  to  consider  the  moral  basis  of 
marriage  and  divorce.  Practically,  it  is  sufficient  to 
say  at  this  point  that  the  offence  is  one  which  has  al- 
ways been  so  sternly  condemned  by  all  men  that  we 
need  not  dwell  longer  upon  it.  Any  man  guilty  of  it 
flies  in  the  face  of  Nature,  society  and  God,  and 
among  the  three  he  will  find  his  punishment. 

But  what  about  commerce  of  the  sexes  which  does 
not  involve  the  element  of  trespass  and  does  not  defile 
the  blood  ?  What  is  the  absolute  and  ideal  right  ?  Is 
the  law  the  same  for  all  ?  Should  all  be  alike  pun- 
ished for  its  breach  ?     Let  us  take  this  last  question 


THE   MORALS   OF   SEX  13 

first.  Should  the  man  and  the  woman  be  held  to  the 
same  accountability  and  be  dealt  with  the  same  way  ? 
The  answer  is,  they  cannot  be.  The  cry  "  the  same 
law  of  purity  for  both  sexes,"  is  both  silly  and  mis- 
chievous. The  champions  of  this  crusade  do  not  seem 
to  perceive  that  in  the  leveling  process  attempted  the 
woman  is  quite  as  likely  to  be  dragged  down  as  the 
man  is  to  be  led  up.  Set  the  ideal  of  manly  purity  as 
high  as  you  w^ill — as  high  as  Christ  does — but  remem- 
ber that  even  then  woman's  purity  must  transcend  it. 
IS'othing  is  gained  by  ignoring  facts.  Society  judges 
the  woman's  fault  far  more  severely  than  it  does  the 
man's,  simply  because  it  believes  the  fault  to  be  far 
more  heinous  in  her  than  in  him.  One  element  in 
guaging  the  gravity  of  an  offence  against  a  rule  is  the 
consideration  of  the  consequences  of  such  offence.  In 
this  offence  the  woman  is  defiled  in  the  body,  in  her 
emotional  nature,  in  her  affections,  in  her  soul,  to  an 
extent  and  in  a  way  w^hich  is  not  true  of  the  man.  In 
her  case  the  consequences  are  conserved,  retained, 
transmitted.  In  his  they  come  to  an  end.  His  of- 
fence may  have  a  moral  aggravation  far  beyond  hers, 
or  it  may  not.  But  the  same  offence  it  is  not,  nor 
can,  nor  ought  society  to  deal  with  her  as  with  him. 
His  penalty  cannot  be  of  the  same  kind  as  the  one 
meted  out  to  her.  If  he  be  threatened  with  that 
alone  by  well-meaning  reformers  and  preachers,  he 
can  well  afford  to  smile  in  their  faces.  Nothing  is 
idler  than  the  rhetoric  about  the  injustice  of  the  fact 


14  THE   MORALS   OF   SEX 

that  she  is  cast  out  to  shame  and  cold  while  he  is  re- 
ceived to  club  and  drawing-room.  This  has  always 
been  society's  method,  and  always  will  be.  The  fault 
has  demonstrated  her  to  be  incapable  to  discharge 
her  social  duty,  while  it  has  not  conclusively  shown 
his  unfitness. 

From  this  the  law  of  sexual  purity  for  women,  and 
the  reasonableness  of  that  law  begins  to  appear.  For 
them  the  law  is  absolute  chastity.  No  excuse  or  pal- 
liation will  be  admitted  in  the  judgment  of  human  so- 
ciety. God's  judgments,  we  may  well  believe,  will  be 
in  many  instances  different.  He  can  heed  the  plea, 
"she  sinned  much  because  she  loved  much."  But 
society  cannot.  There  is  too  much  at  stake.  In  her 
person  society  itself  is  defiled  by  the  offence,  and  is 
compelled  in  self-defence  to  visit  upon  her  a  penalty 
which  does  not  fall  upon  her  partner.  This  may  be 
called  hard,  unjust,  unfair,  atrocious,  but  that  does 
not  change  the  fact.  Beside  that,  a  closer  examina- 
tion of  all  the  data  would  probably  show  that  it  is  not 
open  to  these  charges.  At  any  rate,  it  is  the  way 
in  which  woman  herself  deals  with  her  offending 
sister. 

It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  human  society,  presum- 
ably giving  voice  to  the  will  of  God,  demands  abso- 
lute continence  (1)  of  all  married  men,  under  the 
penalty  which  attaches  to  a  broken  oath ;  (2)  of  all 
Avomen,  under  the  penalty  which  attaches  to  any  act 
which  brings  confusion  into  the  social  structure ;  (3) 


THE   MORALS   OF   SEX  15 

of  all  married  women,  under  an  additional  penalty  for 
debauching  posterity. 

This  leaves  for  consideration  the  case  of  those  men 
Avho  have  contracted  no  obligations,  whose  incon- 
tinence does  not  seem  to  them  to  carry  with  it  any 
evil  consequence,  whom  society  does  not  severely  pun- 
ish, who  find  across  their  path  only  what  seems  to  be 
an  arbitrary  prohibition.  What  will  keep  them  con- 
tinent ?  What  ought  to  keep  them  continent  ?  What 
has  Nature,  what  has  God,  what  has  the  preacher  to 
say  to  the  young  man  here  ?  There  is  no  department 
of  morals  where  it  is  so  difficult  to  speak  honestly. 
There  is  no  place  where  conventional  morality,  both 
in  its  teaching  and  result,  or  lack  of  result  of  its  teach- 
ing, is  so  unsatisfactory.  When  the  young  man  is 
bidden,  "  thou  shalt  not  kill,  thou  shalt  not  steal,  thou 
shalt  not  commit  adultery,"  he  heeds.  In  all  these 
cases  he  sees  both  the  reason  for  the  prohibition  and 
the  peril  of  the  offence.  But  when  he  is  bidden,  "  thou 
shalt  not  commit  fornication,"  he  heeds  little.  He 
knows  that  fornication  is  not  adultery.  The  reasons 
for  its  condemnation  are  not  so  evident.  They  lie  so 
deep  down  in  the  complex  nature  of  things  that  he 
doubts  their  existence.  The  torment  of  an  appetite 
which  he  knows  to  be  "  natural "  drives  him  across  a 
prohibiting  line  which  he  suspects  to  be  "  artificial." 

What  shall  the  moralist,  the  physician,  the  priest 
say  to  these  ?  It  would  surely  be  a  great  gain  if  they, 
all  three,  can  say  the  same  thing.     To  the  unmarried 


16  THE   MORALS    OF   SEX 

American  woman,  little  needs  to  be  said.  She  is 
chaste  by  habit,  by  tradition,  by  pride,  by  instinct,  by 
temperament,  by  physical  nature.  She  needs  little 
exhortation.  But  what  of  the  man  ?  How  many  are 
continent  between  the  ages  of  twenty  and  thirty-five  ? 
No  one  can  say.  Some  are ;  probably  far  more  than 
is  often  supposed.  But  more  are  not.  They  say, 
when  they  speak  at  all  on  the  subject,  that  it  is  "  a 
counsel  of  perfection"  to  which  they  are  not  equal. 
They  find  no  fault  with  the  high  demand  which  con- 
ventional morality  exacts,  but  they  regard  it  as  im- 
possible of  attainment.  What  considerations  can  we 
urge  to  give  vigor  to  the  young  man's  will  by  which 
he  can  bid  his  turbulent  appetite  come  to  heel? 
Christianity  provides  the  supreme  truth.  It  tells  him 
that  his  body  is  the  temple  of  a  Holy  Spirit.  It  warns 
him  against  defiling  the  temple  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
It  asks  him  if  he  will  dare  to  "make  the  body  of 
Christ  the  member  of  a  harlot."  There  are  thousands 
for  whom  this  is  sufficient.  Their  souls  are  inwardly 
reverent,  and  they  compel  their  reluctant  bodies  to  be 
at  least  outwardly  respectful. 

But  there  are  tens  of  thousands  to  whom  this  is  not 
sufficient.  For  various  reasons  the  spiritual  dynamic 
of  Christianity  does  not  touch  them.  Has  the  law  of 
purity  any  other  hold  upon  them  ? 

There  would  seem  to  be  at  least  two  facts  which  we 
can  fairly  urge  to  bid  them  pause.  The  one  is  the 
peril  to  the  body ;  the  other  is  the  peril  to  the  soul. 


THE   MORALS    OF   SEX  17 

Let  us  not  be  misunderstood.  "We  do  not  well  to 
flourish  threats  of  death  to  the  body  or  of  damnation 
to  the  soul.  But  there  are  a  thousand  ills  which  stop 
far  short  of  either  dissolution  or  damnation,  which  are 
nevertheless  so  grave  that  none  but  a  fool  will  take 
chances  with  them.  Fear  may  be  a  low  motive,  but 
the  appeal  to  it  is  not  unworthy.  Indeed  it  probably  is 
in  point  of  fact  the  most  common  of  sanctions.  The 
man  who  buys  sexual  indulgence  habitually,  takes 
risks  of  bodily  damage  which  none  but  a  fool  would 
incur.  He  imperils  his  subsequent  life ;  the  health  of 
his  wife  who  is  to  be  ;  the  life  and  self-respect  of  his 
unborn  children.  Does  he  smile  and  say,  "  I'll  take 
the  chances  "  ?  Would  it  not  be  well  if  we  could  per- 
suade the  experienced  physician  to  say  to  him  :  "  I 
have  heard  men  say  that ;  and  I  have  seen  them  after- 
ward, when  they  wished  that  they  had  at  least  died 
before  they  were  damned  ! " 

There  is  another  penalty,  however,  about  which 
Nature  is  inexorable.  It  is  none  the  less  natural  be- 
cause it  happens  to  be  a  law  of  human  nature.  Why 
is  pure  lust  not  immoral  in  a  beast  ?  And  why  is  it 
immoral  in  a  man?  Because  in  the  beast  it  is  not 
correlated  with  the  affections,  and  in  the  man  it  is. 
"  Making  a  beast  of  one's  self  "  is  not  a  metaphor.  It 
is  a  scientific  statement  of  a  possibility.  It  is  accom- 
plished by  eliminating  the  humane  element  from  any 
human  act  and  thus  reducing  it  to  the  deed  of  an  animal. 
But  this  can  only  be  done  at  the  expense  of  the  human 


18  THE   MORALS    OF   SEX 

part  of  Nature.  If  it  be  done  repeatedly,  the  humane 
element  is  injured.  If  it  be  done  habitually,  the 
humane  element  is  destroyed.  Nature  is  leisurely  but 
unerring  in  her  revenges.  If  one  should  then  be 
counselled  by  the  complaisant  physician,  who  knows 
only  the  body,  to  "  seek  health  by  the  temperate  grati- 
fication of  an  appetite,"  the  religious  adviser  may  be 
allowed  to  intervene  and  sa}^,  "  the  doctor's  advice 
would,  no  doubt,  be  good  if  it  concerned  an  appetite 
which  had  in  it  no  quality  but  physical.  Your  pre- 
scription would  be  well  for  a  beast ;  for  a  man  it  is 
not  well."  Incontinence  of  the  body  means  deteriora- 
tion of  the  soul.  This  would  be  just  as  true  though 
the  Bible  had  never  been  written,  and  though  there 
were  not  a  preacher  of  morality  in  the  world.  "The 
house  of  the  strange  woman  opens  unto  death,  and 
her  paths  unto  the  dead."  The  soul  which  goes  there 
sickens,  and  dies  if  it  abides  there.  This  is  the  price 
which  Nature  fixes.  An}-^  cost  of  self-repression  is 
cheaper.  In  this,  Solomon,  Eobert  Burns,  St.  Paul, 
and  the  Great  Physician  agree. 

I  have  not  mentioned  the  crime  of  seduction  in  any 
of  its  forms.  The  man  who  is  capable  of  taking  ad- 
vantage of  youth,  ignorance,  inexperience,  or  of 
woman's  love  for  the  gratification  of  his  lust,  or  the 
rare,  but  still  existent,  wanton  woman  who  plays  and 
preys  upon  "  the  imperious  instinct  of  man,"  are  both 
alike  beyond  argument.  They  are  condemned  al- 
ready. 


THE  MORALS   OF   SEX  19 

' '  "Who  cast  the  devils  from  the  Gaddarene, 
Could  hardly  do  so  much  for  these  I  ween." 

II.  I  said  that  we  are  confronted  by  a  new  social 
and  economic  order  which  has  greatly  aggravated  the 
difficulties  in  this  region  of  morals.  In  a  simple  social 
structure  each  man  and  each  woman  is  mated  and 
mated  early.  Physical  appetite  is  transfigured  by  af- 
fection, and  held  in  check  by  the  responsibility  of 
parentage.  But  each  generation  the  average  age  of 
marriage  is  being  pushed  farther  onward,  and  the  per- 
centage of  unmarried  men  and  women  increases. 
Within  the  last  fifty  years  the  average  age  of  mar- 
riage in  ]S'ew  York  State  has  been  pushed  upward,  for 
men  from  about  twenty-two  to  about  twenty-seven,  and 
for  women  from  nineteen  to  twenty-four,  as  near  as  can 
be  deduced  from  the  very  imcomplete  statistics. 
Speaking  generally  two  causes  are  at  work  to  bring 
about  this  result.  First,  the  increasing  exigency  of 
life,  and  second,  the  increasing  personal  independence 
of  women.  Suppose  the  man  is  a  professional  man. 
He  leaves  the  preparatory  school  at  nineteen,  leaves 
the  university  at  twenty-two,  leaves  the  technical 
school  at  twenty-six.  Assume  for  him  at  the  outset 
even  more  than  average  professional  success.  He 
cannot  and  does  not  marry  until  he  has  passed  thirty. 
Suppose  he  goes  at  once  from  the  public  high  school 
at  nineteen  to  learn  a  skilled  trade  or  to  go  into  busi- 
ness, he  cannot  get  to  the  point  when  he  can  marry 
and  live  in  this  city  much  earlier.     Only  the  unskilled 


20  THE   MORALS    OF   SEX 

laborer  can  marry  shortly  after  maturity,  because  his 
ability  to  support  a  family  is  at  its  best  from  twenty- 
four  to  thirty-four,  and  rapidly  declines  thereafter. 

The  case  of  women  is  the  same,  Avith  aggravating 
circumstances.  The  butcher's  daughter  and  the  bak- 
er's now  remain  in  the  public  school  until  nineteen  or 
twenty.  I  was  present  lately  at  the  opening  exercises 
of  a  high  school  containing  two  thousand  four  hundred 
young  women,  the  majority  of  whom  were  older  than 
their  grandmothers  had  been  when  their  mothers  were 
born.  Do  not  understand  me  to  be  making  an  argu- 
ment for  "  early  marriages."  I  am  not  making  an 
argument  at  all.  I  am  trying  to  make  a  diagnosis. 
We  are  set  to  preach  purity.  To  do  so  effectively  we 
must  know  to  whom  we  are  preaching.  "We  are  sur- 
rounded by  thousands  and  thousands  of  unmarried 
men  and  women  who  remain  unmarried  for  a  length 
of  time,  far  longer  than  has  ever  been  known  in  any 
other  time  and  place.  The  men  are  journeymen 
mechanics,  clerks,  commercial  travellers,  salesmen, 
lawyers,  engineers,  doctors.  The  women  are  college 
graduates,  shop  girls,  factory  girls,  saleswomen, 
stenographers,  and  myriads  of  young  women  living 
aimless  lives  in  dull  homes,  waiting  while  their  bloom 
fades  for  the  man  to  speak,  who  cannot  speak  because 
he  cannot  make  a  home  to  which  to  invite  her. 

But  what  of  tlie  "  imperious  instinct  "  meanwhile  ? 
Love  of  life  and  the  instinct  of  generation  are  the  two 
elemental  forces.     Society  has  safeguarded  life,  made 


THE   MORALS   OF   SEX  21 

it  comfortable,  lengthened  it.  Never  was  human  life 
so  secure,  so  pleasant,  so  easy.  American  society  has 
certainly  succeeded  in  its  aim  at  "  life,  liberty,  and  the 
pursuit  of  happiness."  But  does  any  one  suppose  that 
the  companion  "instinct  of  propagation"  can  be 
ignored,  or  forgotten  or  suppressed  without  it  having 
its  revenges  ?  Does  society  do  well  to  make  individ- 
ual life  easy  and  homes  difficult  ?  After  a  young 
man  has  lived  for  five  years  at  a  Mills'  hotel,  and  a 
young  woman  in  a  Young  Women's  Christian  Asso- 
ciation boarding-house,  will  they  be  more  or  less  likely 
to  combine  their  lives  in  the  narrowness  of  a  home  ? 
One  is  tempted  to  ponder  upon  the  proverb  that  "  the 
wise  ones  of  the  world  are  kept  busy  undoing  the 
deeds  of  the  good  ones."  The  hard  fact  confronts  us 
that  the  sex  instincts  of  nature  are  more  and  more 
obstructed  by  the  exigencies  of  human  society.  Con- 
tinence is  subjected  to  a  longer  and  ever  more  severe 
strain.  Is  it  surprising  that  it  breaks  down  ?  What 
reinforcement  can  the  minister  of  religion  bring  to 
the  continent  will  which  finds  itself  called  upon  to  ar- 
bitrate between  the  law  of  the  mind  and  the  law  of 
the  members,  after  the  contest  has  been  artificially 
prolonged  beyond  the  time  which  Nature  has  decreed  ? 
It  may  be  well  to  say  at  this  point  that  I  assume  the 
appetite  of  sex  to  be  just  as  legitimate  and  as  noble  as 
any  appetite  whatsoever.  Indeed  one  might  say 
much  more.  Whosoever  shall  penetrate  the  ultimate 
mystery  of  sex  will  have  gone  far  to  know  the  es- 


22  THE   MORALS    OF   SEX 

sential  nature  of  God.  Creation  and  procreation  are 
more  nearly  allied  than  are  any  other  motions  of  the 
Creator  and  the  creature.  The  religion  of  Christ 
ought  by  now  to  have  recovered  from  the  sickly  taint 
of  asceticism  with  which  the  mumified  corpse  of  dual- 
ism infected  it  in  the  Thebaid  centuries  ago.  The 
monk  and  cloistered  nun  have  never  been  altogether 
sane.  Their  confessions,  their  hymns  and  prayers, 
their  theology  and  casuistry  proclaim  them  less  than 
Christian  because  less  than  human.  I  believe  that  we 
will  never  be  able  to  urge  and  interpret  God's  law  of 
chastity  except  as  we  honestly  and  reverently  recog- 
nize the  truth  that  "  in  God's  image  created  He  them, 
male  and  female  created  He  them."  It  may  well  be 
that  just  now  the  most  efficient  way  in  which  we  can 
preach  personal  purity  shall  be  by  addressing  our- 
selves to  the  correction  of  some  of  those  things  in  the 
social  and  economic  order  which  make  impossible  that 
condition  of  things  which  God  contemplated  when  He 
promulgated  His  law. 

III.  We  are  concerned  with  the  application  of  the 
Christian  law  of  sex  relationships  to  divorce  and  remar. 
riage.  This  discussion  usually  commences  with  an 
array  of  statistics  to  show  the  rapidly  increasing  num- 
ber of  divorces.  I  will  assume  the  figures.  Let  us 
admit  the  extreme.  In  one  state  there  is  one  di- 
vorce for  every  six  marriages.  In  other  states  they 
range  from  this  downward  to  South  Carolina  where 
there  are  none.     The  fact  of  consequence  is  that  there 


THE   MORALS    OF   SEX  23 

has  been  and  is  a  rapidly  increasing  disposition  to 
break  the  bonds  of  matrimony  when  they  begin  to 
chafe, — and  in  a  less  marked  degree  a  disposition  for 
those  thus  made  free  to  contract  new  alliances.  There 
is  so  little  question  of  the  facts  that  it  would  be  time 
wasted  even  to  exhibit  them. 

But  the  second  step  in  the  discussion  is  usually  to 
argue  that  all  this  indicates  a  prevailing  laxity  of 
sexual  morality,  and  a  perilous  lowering  of  the  ideal 
relations  of  man  and  woman.  This  I  believe  to  be  an 
error.  A  careful  examination  of  the  facts  will  show 
that,  taking  the  country  as  a  whole,  a  slow  but  steady 
advance  in  chastity  has  occurred  much  in  the  same 
way  as  has  occurred  the  advance  in  temperance.  The 
multiplication  of  divorces  is  not  to  be  accounted  for 
by  the  division  of  the  sum  total  of  popular  morality. 
If  this  were  the  situation  the  Church's  task  would  be 
a  very  simple,  even  though  not  an  easy  one.  But  the 
reasons  are  far  more  complicated.  Speaking  broadl}'", 
it  may  truly  be  said  that  Christianity  itself  has  caused 
the  present  multiplication  of  divorces.  Every  intelli- 
gent student  of  Christianity  has  noted  the  way  in 
which  it  began  almost  at  once  to  change  the  status  of 
woman  in  society.  It  began  by  crediting  her  with  an 
independent  personality.  But  the  accumulated  tradi- 
tions of  countless  generations  stood  between  her  and 
the  conscious  realization  of  her  personality.  In  all 
human  society  she  stood  in  a  position  of  less  dignity 
than  that  of  a  slave  or  even  of  a  chattel.     A  bonds- 


24  THE   MORALS   OF   SEX 

man  or  an  ox  had  at  least  an  individuality  of  its  own. 
The  woman  had  not.  She  was  an  appendage  of  some 
man — of  a  father,  a  husband,  a  brother,  or  even  a  son. 
All  law,  all  custom,  all  social  order,  all  domestic  life  was 
built  upon  this  conception  of  woman.  Even  St.  Paul 
asserts  it  and  bases  his  dicta  upon  it.  But  what  is  of 
more  significance,  this  was  woman's  conception  of  her- 
self. And  woman  is,  as  Amiel  says,  "  the  very  genius 
of  conservatism." 

The  glory  of  Christianity  is  that  it  has  at  long  last 
succeeded  in  bringing  woman  to  conceive  of  her  own 
personalit}''  as  Christ  conceived  of  it.  The  process  has 
been  a  marvellousl}'^  slow  one.  Indeed  it  is  only 
within  our  own  time  that  the  result  has  begun  to 
show  in  any  large  way.  The  phenomenon  is  not 
fitly  termed  the  "emancipation  of  woman."  It  is  not 
"  emancipation."  It  is  not  "  independence."  It  is  a 
coming  to  consciousness  of  self.  The  free  woman  in 
Christ  is  not  thereby  set  in  opposition  to  men,  or 
transformed  into  a  man  in  all  save  bodil}^  function. 
It  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  "  suffrage  "  or  with  the 
"  right  to  earn  her  own  living."  But  this  new-found 
consciousness  of  absolute  and  underived  personality 
has  given  to  her  a  new-found,  and  sometimes  bewil- 
dering sense  of  her  personal  dignity  and  personal 
sanctity.  This  is  what  we  wish,  what  Christ  in- 
tended, what  we  would  not  have  turned  backward. 
But  when  this  stage  has  been  reached  why  should  we 
be  amazed  if  she  turn  to  society  and  ask,  sometimes 


THE   MORALS   OF   SEX  25 

tearfully  aud  sometimes  defiantly,  "  Am  I  a  person  ? 
Am  I  not  the  owner  of  my  own  body  ?  Can  Chris- 
tian law  under  any  conceivable  circumstances  lay  an 
obligation  upon  me,  or  so  construe  any  promise  which 
I  have  made,  as  to  command  me  to  give  my  body  to 
the  embrace  of  any  man  against  my  will  ? "  Thus 
Christianity  itself  has  led  not  a  few  women  to  the 
point  where  their  religion  prompts  them  to  take  an 
action  the  precise  opposite  to  that  which  devout 
women  of  an  earlier  stage  would  have  taken.  At  that 
earlier  stage  a  devoted  woman  endured  to  her  life's  end 
the  approaches  of  a  brutal  or  drunken  or  distasteful 
husband  because  her  religious  sense  bade  her  do  so. 
To-day  her  equally  pious  granddaughter  utterly  re- 
fuses such  outrage  of  her  personality  because  her 
religious  sense  bids  her  so !  Divorce  is  just  as  likely 
to  be  the  result  of  a  higher  moral  ideal  as  of  a  lower 
one.  We  may  as  well  face  the  fact  that  marriage  is 
coming  more  and  more  to  be  thought  of  as  a  mutual 
contract  between  two  self-contained  persons  than  as 
the  absorption  of  the  wife's  personality  by  the  hus- 
band's. And  Cliristianity  has  done  this  b}''  transform- 
ing the  woman  from  a  possession  into  a  person.  Do 
we  wish  that  undone  ?  If  not,  then  all  the  exhorta- 
tion of  the  "  conservative  " — who  is  the  man  with  his 
eyes  in  the  back  of  his  head — all  his  exhortations  to 
bring  back  what  he  calls  the  "  primitive  basis  of  the 
marriage  bond,"  is  idle.  The  sacred  marriage  estate 
lies  before  us,  not  behind.     1  am  willing  to  say  that 


26  THE   MORALS    OF   SEX 

for  one  I  believe  that  in  most  cases  Avliere  divorces 
are  actually  granted  it  is  better  upon  the  whole  for 
the  state  to  loose  the  bans  Avhich  have  become  fetters 
than  to  hold  them  fast, — better  for  the  men  and 
women  concerned,  better  for  society,  better  for  pub- 
lic morals.  In  point  of  fact  they  never  were  those 
"whom  God  had  joined  together."  As  to  the  re- 
marriage of  the  severed  individuals,  that  is  quite  a 
different  question,  and  a  far  more  difficult  one,  both 
for  the  state  and  the  Church.  But  this  is  the  stage 
at  which  the  Church  comes  face  to  face  with  the 
problem. 

Concerning  a  first  marriage  it  would  seem  that  the 
Church  could  do  no  more  than  she  has  already  done. 
That  is  to  Avarn  the  young  man  and  maiden  who  ask 
her  benediction  upon  their  vows  that  "if  any  persons 
be  joined  together  otherwise  than  as  God's  word  doth 
allow,  their  marriage  is  not  lawful."  Shall  she  at- 
tempt to  pass  judgment  upon  the  facts  in  each  in- 
stance ?  If  so,  what  is  to  be  her  measure  or  standard 
of  legality  ?  If  by  "  God\s  word  "  here  she  mean  the 
written  scriptures  she  simply  cannot  derive  from  them 
a  working  statute.  They  were  not  written  for  such  a 
purpose.  If  she  mean  the  ideal  prerequisites  and  con- 
ditions of  Christian  marriage,  as  is  the  practical  con- 
struction of  the  phrase,  then  she  can  do  no  more  than 
adjure  them  by  the  sober  warning  of  judgment  to 
come,  that  "  if  there  be  any  impediment  they  do  now 
confess  it."     The  practical  outcome  of  the  common 


THE   MORALS    OF   SEX  27 

admonitions  of  our  more  or  less  reverend  fathers  in 
God  that  we  should  look  with  more  care  to  the  origi- 
nal marriages,  seems  to  me  to  amount  to  this  and 
nothing  more. 

But  what  of  the  remarriage  of  those  Avho  have  been 
divorced  ?  Shall  the  Church  forbid  it  absolutely  ? 
Shall  she  forbid  it,  with  exceptions  ?  Shall  she  per- 
mit it  absolutely  ?  Whichever  she  decides  upon,  what 
shall  be  the  ground  upon  which  she  shall  rest  her 
decision  ? 

The  real  difficulty  is  with  the  last  question.  What 
is  the  law  which  governs  the  Christian  Church  in  this 
cause  ?  And  where  is  it  written  ?  Many,  possibly 
most,  will  repl}^,  the  law  is  in  the  New  Testament.  I 
think  they  are  mistaken.  Christ  enunciated  no  law 
of  marriage  and  divorce.  He  did  that  which  was 
ultimately  to  make  marriage  a  sacrificial  symbol  and 
separation  an  impossibility,  but  not  by  dictating 
statutes.  He  did  for  the  Seventh  Commandment 
what  He  did  for  the  Sixth  and  the  Eighth,  and  waited 
for  time  to  show  the  result.  "  Thou  shalt  not  kill," 
says  the  law :  Christ  gives  it  the  dynamic,  "  whoso- 
ever hateth  his  brother  is  a  murderer."  "  Thou  shalt 
not  steal "  becomes  dynamical  through  His,  "  love  thy 
neighbor  as  thyself."  "Thou  shalt  not  commit 
adultery."  "Whoso  looketh  Avith  lust  is  an  adul- 
terer." The  attempt  to  extract  a  canon  from  the 
words  of  Christ  is  the  mediasval  philosopher's  task  to 
distill  bottles  full  of  elixir  of  life  out  of  the  morning 


28  THE   MORALS   OF   SEX 

dew.  "  My  words  are  spirit,  and  they  are  life." 
When  the  exegete  sets  about  with  purblind  eye  to  ex- 
amine the  words  through  the  opaque  lens  of  learning 
for  the  purpose  of  turning  his  rendering  over  to  the 
canonist  to  be  written  in  the  black  letter  of  ecclesias- 
tical law,  the  Christian  can  only  go  about  his  business, 
— and  wait  with  what  patience  he  can. 

The  history  of  the  Christian  society  is  the  gradual 
unfolding  of  the  work  of  Christ  in  this  cause  as  in  all 
others.  The  early  Christians  did  not  conceive  polyg- 
amy to  be  inconsistent  with  their  profession.  As  a 
matter  of  expediency  it  was  agreed  that  the  clergy 
must  be  monogamists.  But  there  would  have  been  no 
meaning  in  the  mandate,  "  let  a  bishop  be  the  husband 
of  one  wife,"  if  the  same  rule  had  antecedently  been 
regarded  as  binding  upon  clergy  and  laity  alike.  And 
how  could  the  early  Christians  take  that  attitude  hav- 
ing only  the  Old  Testament  in  their  hands,  and  the 
New  not  yet  written  ?  It  may  be  a  surprise  to  be  re- 
minded that  the  Catholic  Church  has  not  to  this  day 
officially  pronounced  that  the  possession  of  a  plurality 
of  wives  is  'j)er  se  a  bar  to  membership.  It  is  still  an 
open  question  whether  a  missionary  in  pagan  land 
may  withhold  baptism  from  a  sincere  convert  until 
he  put  away  all  his  wives  but  one.  As  a  matter  of 
fact  Christ  has  eradicated  polygamy  as  He  has  done 
slavery  bj  slowly  producing  individuals  whose  nature 
is  such  that  they  cannot  be  either  polygamists  or 
skives.      Can    the   same  method  be  trusted  to  eradi- 


THE   MORALS    OF   SEX  29 

cate  the  ancient  custom  of  divorce  ?     Surely  we  must 
think  so. 

But  what  can  the  Church  do  meanwhile  ?  I  reply, 
she  may  make  such,  and  only  such  canonical  regula- 
tions as  are  not  for  her  idtra  vires.  Let  me  say  here, 
in  passing,  what  has  been  often  said  by  wise  Church- 
men, that  our  Church  is  exposed  to  peculiar  danger  from 
the  lack  of  any  judicial  tribunal  to  determine  the  limit 
of  her  right  to  legislate  upon  any  cause.  If  a  secular 
legislature  pass  a  law  which  it  has  really  no  power  to 
do,  a  supreme  court  so  adjudges,  and  the  law  at  once 
becomes  nul  and  void.  In  our  Church  the  people  are 
only  fairly  well  saved  from  such  legislation  by  the  fact 
that  what  we  call  the  common  law  of  the  Church  is  so 
generally  respected,  and  by  the  further  fact  that  vio- 
lation of  canonical  law  is  so  uncommonly  easy  and 
free  from  danger. 

From  the  beginning  it  has  been  admitted  that  the 
Church  may  make  such  regulations  for  the  conduct  of 
the  clergy  as  she  deems  expedient,  provided  the  com- 
mon rights  of  Christian  people  are  not  encroached 
upon.  Thus  she  has  forbidden  the  clergy  to  bear  arms, 
to  submit  to  the  trial  by  combat,  to  marry,  to  engage  in 
unseemly  avocations,  and  such  like.  All  these  regula- 
tions rest  upon  expediency,  and  are  of  their  nature 
transitory,  local,  may  be  modified,  or  revoked  when 
conditions  change.  On  this  ground  I  think  the  clergy 
may  well  be  instructed  not  to  officiate  at  the  remar- 
riage of  any  divorced  person.     If   such   a   canonical 


30  THE    MOKALS    OF    SEX 

prohibition  were  passed  I  would  cheerfully  obey  it. 
I  should  vote  for  such  a  canon.  Practically,  I  see  no 
other  course  open  to  the  Church  at  the  present  stage. 
The  clergy  must  either  be  left  free  to  marry  any  and 
all  divorced  persons  or  must  be  forbidden  to  marry  any. 
Discrimination  is  not  possible  for  the  obvious  reason 
that  the  Church  possesses  no  machinery  of  her  own  by 
which  to  ascertain  the  facts  concerning  any  case  of  di- 
vorce, and  she  cannot  commit  her  action  to  the  formal 
decisions  of  secular  court  without  by  that  act  com- 
mitting ecclesiastical  suicide.  Let  the  Church  forbid 
the  clergy  to  remarry  divorced  persons  ; — and  let  her 
stop  right  there. 

I  say,  stop  right  there,  because  the  Church  cannot 
see  her  way  any  farther  at  present.  No  agreement 
can  now  be  reached  as  to  what  marriages  God's  word 
doth  allow,  and  what  ones  it  doth  disallow.  Some 
maintain  that  marriage  is  indissoluble  for  any  cause ; 
some  that  adultery  by  either  party  vacates  it  abso- 
lutely ;  some  that  such  breach  of  vow  only  releases  the 
other  party  to  the  extent  of  separation  a  mensa  et 
thoro ;  some  that  the  secular  law  fixes  the  status  of 
every  individual  in  this  regard  so  that  the  Church  is 
free  to  bless  any  marriage  when  the  state  pronounces 
the  parties  marriageable.  All  appeal  to  the  dicta  of 
Christ  as  recorded  and  interpreted  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. 

Now,  while  this  situation  continues  the  Church  dare 
not  go  any  farther  in  exercising  discipline  upon  the 


THE   MORALS    OF   SEX  31 

laity  than  she  has  already  done  in  her  rubrics.  By 
fundamental  Catholic  law  and  custom  there  are  only 
two  offences  for  which  a  citizen  in  Christ's  visible 
Kingdom  may  be  expelled.  They  are,  firsts  notorious 
uncharitableness :  i.  e.,  the  demonstrated  absence  of 
the  Christian  spirit ;  and  second,  notorious  evil  living, 
i.  e.,  the  demonstrated  absence  of  the  Christian  con- 
duct. Under  this  later  rubric  the  priest  ex-communi- 
cates for  a  breach  of  the  Seventh  Commandment  when 
the  offence  has  come  to  be  common  knowledge.  He 
needs  no  canonical  permission  to  deal  with  an  offence 
whose  definition  has  been  already  determined.  "What 
then  of  the  case  of  communicants  who  have  been 
legally  divorced,  let  us  say  for  desertion,  and  have 
been  remarried,  let  us  say  by  a  magistrate,  who  be- 
lieve that  they  have  violated  no  law  of  God,  and  who  are 
living  a  sober  life,  and  are  regarded  by  the  community 
as  upright  men  or  women  ?  Shall  the  Church  ex-com- 
municate them  ?  If  so,  on  what  ground  ?  Are  they 
adulterers  ?  Not  unless  the  Church  shall  have  by  her 
ohiter  dicta  added  to  the  definition  of  adultery.  But 
if  the  Church  may  arbitrarily  label  an  action  adultery, 
and  punish  it  under  the  Seventh  Commandment,  she 
may  with  equal  right  label  stock-broking  theft,  and 
punish  it  under  the  Eighth  Commandment,  or  pro- 
nounce a  manager  of  the  Brooklyn  Rapid  Transit 
System  a  murderer,  and  ex-communicate  him  under  the 
Sixth.  But  are  they  "  notorious  evil  livers  "  ?  Clearly 
not,  for  the  Christian  community  in  which  they  live 


32  THE   MORALS    OF   SEX 

does  not  so  regard  them.  What,  then,  shall  the 
Church  do  with  them  ?  I  answer,  do  what  the  Church 
is  commissioned  to  do  ;  exhort,  teach,  illuminate, — and 
wait.  But  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  not  to  be  taken 
by  violence,  nor  is  the  citizen  to  be  expelled  by  vio- 
lence. The  sons  of  thunder  are  not  the  apostles 
whose  proposed  legislation  the  Master  approves. 

There  are  two  quite  distinct  questions  before  the 
Church  now,  and  much  depends  upon  this  distinction 
coming  to  be  seen  and  acknowledged.  The  regula- 
tion of  the  action  of  the  clergy  is  one  thing:  that 
can  be  fixed  arbitrarily,  can  be  changed  as  conditions 
change,  need  not  rest  upon  any  final  declaration  by  the 
Church  of  the  intrinsic  nature  of  the  thing  allowed  or 
forbidden.  But  the  discipline  of  the  laity  is  quite  a 
different  thing.  They  have  rights  which  cannot  be 
taken  a^Yay  by  arbitrary  statutes.  "  Let  a  man  so  ex- 
amine himself  before  he  presume  to  eat  of  that  bread 
or  drink  of  that  cup,"  is  the  formula  of  the  original 
charter.  Possibly  he  may  eat  and  drink  damnation. 
That  is  his  affair. 

A  great  bishop  said  wisely  that  he  had  rather  see 
Eno;land  free  than  sober.  Better  that  the  ecclesiastical 
state  should  bo  free  than  that  it  should  be  beyond  re- 
proach. 


CHUECH  AND  CLEKGY 


II 

CHUECH   AND    CLERGY 

No  doubt  the  experience  of  every  clergyman  Avho 
has  a  large  acquaintance  among  his  brethren  is  the 
same  as  my  own  in  one  particular,  that  is,  that  we  are 
kept  continually  heart-sore  by  the  stories  which  are 
confided  to  us  by  men  who  are  either  out  of  work  or 
who  are  doing  their  work  under  conditions  which 
they  feel  to  be  hopeless. 

For  instance,  here  is  a  priest  under  forty,  who  was 
for  eight  years  the  rector  of  a  prosperous  parish  in  a 
southwestern  state.  His  salary  was  satisfactory  and 
his  work  in  every  way  to  his  liking ;  he  was  recog- 
nized to  be  an  able  man  in  the  Church  and  in  the 
community.  His  wife  contracted  malaria.  Year  by 
year  he  saw  himself  being  gradually  closed  in  to  an 
awful  dilemma.  Either  he  must  resign  and  go  away, 
facing  the  chances  of  starvation,  or  he  must  stay  and 
see  his  wife  die.  He  resigned,  as  any  honorable  man 
would  have  done.  The  question  now  is.  What  is 
there  for  him  to  do  ?  I  know  that  at  this  point  there 
are  not  a  few  who  would  make  the  suggestion,  pri- 
vately, if  not  publicly,  that  he  had  no  business  ever  to 
have  had  a  wife  at  all.  This  suggestion  I  will  con- 
sider later  on. 

35 


36  CHUECH   AND    CLERGY 

Here  is  another  instance :  A  man  who  has  been 
for  ten  years,  and  still  is,  rector  of  a  church  in  a  por- 
tion of  a  city  from  which  the  people  are  moving 
away.  When  he  began  his  work  everything  was 
hopeful,  and  he  did  his  duty  with  confidence  in  the 
future.  As  the  years  passed  on,  however,  confidence 
gave  place  to  doubtfulness,  doubt  was  succeeded  by 
fear,  and  fear  gave  place  to  despair.  His  brethren 
of  the  clergy,  to  whom  he  has  quietly  talked  of  the 
situation,  have  done  their  best  again  and  again  to  se- 
cure some  more  hopeful  field  for  him,  but  so  far  in 
vain.  There  he  is,  a  strong  man,  a  good  man,  eating 
out  his  heart  in  a  task  which  is  absolutely  hopeless. 
What  can  he  do  ? 

Take  still  another  case  :  Here  is  a  man  who  came 
into  the  Church  four  years  ago  from  the  Presby- 
terians. He  is  a  scholar  and  a  gentleman,  and  is  a 
distinct  addition  to  the  strength  of  the  ministry  as 
a  whole.  He  resigned  the  pastorate  of  a  substantial 
and  prosperous  church  and  came  to  us.  He  was  able 
to  maintain  himself  and  his  family  with  some  degree 
of  comfort  during  the  dreadful  year  of  quarantine 
which  our  canons  demand.  Now  he  is  ready  and 
capable  of  doing  as  good  work  as  is  to  be  found  in  the 
Church.     Is  there  any  place  for  him  ? 

After  being  disturbed  in  mind  for  a  long  time  by 
these  and  similar  concrete  instances,  I  determined  to 
settle  once  and  for  all,  to  my  own  satisfaction,  the 
elementary  question,  ^.  <?.,  Is  there  any  place  in  the 


CHURCH   AND   CLERGY  37 

ministry  for  the  men  I  have  described  ?  In  order  to 
do  so,  I  sent  to  every  bishop  of  a  diocese  or  missionary 
jurisdiction  in  this  country  the  following  letter : 

" il/y  dear  Bisliop : 

"  I  beg  that  you  will  not  think  that  I  trespass  when 
I  ask  you  to  do  me  the  great  favor  to  tell  whether  or 
not  there  may  be  in  your  diocese  an  opening  at  pres- 
ent, or  in  the  near  future,  for  a  priest  who  seeks 
work  ?  The  man  I  have  in  mind  is  about  thirty-five 
years  old,  a  gentleman,  a  Prayer  Book  Churchman,  a 
good  preacher,  and  has  been  successful  in  his  two 
previous  charges.  He  has  a  wife  and  two  children. 
I  do  not  see  how  he  could  live  upon  less  than  $1,000  a 
year,  with  a  house. 

"  Is  there  a  place  in  your  diocese  for  such  a  man  ? 
Or  have  you  a  place  where  such  a  man  might  have 
an  assured,  even  if  meagre,  support  for  a  couple  of 
years  while  he  should  make  a  position  for  himself ! 

"  I  am  sorry  to  trouble  you,  but  I  would  esteem  it 
a  great  favor  if  -\ovl  will  let  me  know,  in  a  word, 
whether  or  not  such  a  place  might  be  looked  for  with 
you.  Yery  sincerely  vours, 

"  S.  I).  McCONNELL." 

This  letter  was  sent  to  about  sevent}?-  bishops.  I 
have  received  replies  from  fifty-nine  of  them.  These 
included  the  Bishops  of  Maine,  Vermont,  Massachu- 
setts, Ehode  Island,  Connecticut,  New  York,  Albany, 
Long  Island,  Central  '^qmt  York,  New  Jersey,  Penn- 
sylvania, Central  Pennsylvania,  Pittsburg,  Delaware, 
Maryland,  Washington,  Kentucky,  Virginia,  Illinois, 
Springfield,  Southern  Ohio,  Missouri,  Kansas,  Ten- 
nessee, Georgia,  Michigan,  Milwaukee,  Duluth,  Min- 
nesota,  Colorado    and   Nebraska   and   many   others. 


r-  r 


38  CHUKCH   AND    CLERGY 

They  all  reply  that  there  is  not  now,  or  likely  to  be, 
in  the  near  future,  any  opening  for  such  a  man  as  I 
described.  The  two  exceptions  are,  one  in  a  north- 
western diocese,  where  the  bishop  mentioned  a  vacant 
parish  which  paid  a  salary  of  $1,200  a  year.  He  said, 
farther,  that  to  his  knowledge  the  vestry  had  more 
than  thirty  candidates  under  consideration,  and  that 
he  himself  had  named  three,  none  of  which  were 
satisfactory  to  the  vestry.  The  other  vacancy  was  in 
the  diocese  of  Albany.  If  there  is  any  better  way  in 
which  to  secure  an  accurate  statement  of  the  exact 
situation  concerning  supply  and  demand  in  the 
Church,  I  don't  know  it.  I  have  asked  every  bishop 
in  the  Church  if  he  knows  of  any  place  where  a  first- 
rate  man  with  a  wife  and  two  children,  a  man  who 
has  been  successful,  who  is  a  good  preacher,  a  good 
parish  worker,  a  good  citizen,  and  who  resigned  his 
last  parish  for  reasons  which  were  j)erfectly  satisfac- 
tory, can  have  a  bare  living  for  himself  and  his  fam- 
ily. The  reply  is  that  there  are  just  two  such  places 
in  the  American  Church,  and  that  there  are  forty  men 
who  want  each  of  them. 

The  bishops  in  their  replies  have  a  uniform  tone  of 
despondency  which  is  most  striking.  One,  the  bishop 
of  one  of  the  dioceses  in  Pennsylvania,  says  :  "  I  have 
nothing  to  offer  suitable  for  a  man  with  a  family. 
Indeed  the  '  family '  part  is  becoming  more  and  more 
a  serious  drawback."  The  Bishop  of  Massachusetts 
writes :     "  One  of  the  burdens  of  my  life  is  writing  just 


CHUECH   AND   CLEEGY  39 

such  letters  as  this.  In  to-day's  mail,  for  instance,  I 
received  this  and  another  letter  of  similar  purport.  I 
have  been  at  my  office  two  hours  and  have  had  two 
clergymen  in  with  the  same  request.  I  am  sometimes 
tempted  to  write  an  article  and  head  it,  '  What  is  the 
matter  with  the  Church  ! ' "  The  Bishop  of  NeAv 
Jersey  says :  "  There  is  not  a  vacant  parish  or  mission 
at  this  time  in  this  diocese."  The  Bishop  of  Connec- 
ticut says :  "  Facts  like  these  make  one  of  the  heaviest 
burdens  of  this  office."  One  of  the  oldest  and  most 
distinguished  bishops  in  the  Church,  whose  name  I  do 
not  feel  at  liberty  to  mention,  says  :  "  It  seems  to  me 
that  before  a  long  time  it  will  be  found  that  we  have 
more  men  than  places,  more  clergy,  such  as  they  are, 
than  supporting  parishes.  I  say  this  partially  because 
some  years  ago  I  gave  much  time,  effort  and  exhor- 
tation to  the  increase  of  the  ministry.  This  is  the 
season  of  confession."  The  Bishop  of  Washington 
writes  :  "  The  majority  of  the  salaries  in  this  diocese 
are  less  than  $700  a  year.  We  have  a  splendid  corps 
of  clergy  doing  most  valuable  work ;  it  is  a  constant 
surprise  to  me  that  we  could  secure  them  on  such 
terms." 

In  a  majority  of  cases  the  bishops  volunteered  to  say 
that  the  average  salaries  of  their  clergy  were  from 
$500  to  $800  per  year. 

Now  let  us  see  precisely  what  the  situation  is.  I  am 
not  speaking  at  all  of  that  more  or  less  numerous  body 
of  impracticable,  incapable,  restless  clergy,  who  either 


40  CHURCH   AND   CLERGY 

have  nothing  to  give  to  a  parish  which  is  worth  pay- 
ing for  or  who  will  not  remain  long  enough  in  any 
one  parish  to  let  the  people  discover  it.  Nor  do  I 
have  in  mind  that  practically  exhaustless  number 
of  clergymen  of  other  churches  who  would  gladly 
enter  our  ministry  if  they  were  able  to  see  any  proba- 
bility of  a  livelihood  therein,  I  speak  of  the  support 
which  may  be  fairly  counted  upon  bv  strong,  earnest 
and  capable  men.  I  asked  for  one  such  $1,000  and  a 
house  for  the  support  of  himself  and  his  family. 
There  are  only  two  such  places  vacant  at  this  moment 
in  the  American  Church,  the  bishops  being  the  wit- 
nesses. Is  the  demand  which  I  make  for  this  man  un- 
reasonable ?  It  is  the  wages  of  a  carpenter,  of  a  sales- 
man in  a  department  store,  less  than  that  of  a  brick- 
layer. To  qualify  him  to  discharge  the  duties  of  his 
office  the  Church  required  him  to  spend  at  least  five 
years,  and  more  probably  seven,  in  special  preparation. 
]^or,  again,  do  I  bring  any  accusation  against  the 
laity  for  failure  to  do  their  duty;  I  have  no  faith 
in  such  accusations.  I  believe  that  the  laity  will  pay 
for  the  support  of  just  so  many  and  just  such  kind  of 
clergy  as  are  needed  to  discharge  the  priest's  office  in 
the  Church  of  God.  If  for  any  reason  the  Church 
sees  fit  b}^  its  methods  to  distribute  the  aggregate 
amount  contributed  by  the  laity  for  this  purpose 
among  more  priests  than  are  needed,  there  will  be  just 
so  much  less  for  each  one.  If  the  Church  retains  in 
her  ministry  men  who  do  not  actually  give  the  goods 


CHURCH    AND    CLERGY  41 

which  the  hiity  have  a  right  to  expect,  the  lait}^  will 
decline  to  paj^  Mere  scolding  or  exhortation  will 
have  no  effect  in  the  premises. 

But  if  the  facts  are  as  I  have  stated,  there  are  sev- 
eral classes  of  people  who  ought  to  know  it.  First  of 
all  are  the  candidates  for  orders.  If  it  be  true,  as  I 
believe  it  is,  that  the  time  has  arrived  when,  generally 
speaking,  every  young  man  entering  the  ministry  must 
expect  to  mncike  Ids  own  pcorish,  and  not  to  find  one 
ready  to  hand,  it  is  clearly  desirable  that  he  should 
have  this  fact  drawn  to  his  attention  early. 

The  situation  is  new.  Twenty  years  ago  the  aver- 
age young  man  ready  to  be  ordained  might  fairly 
take  for  granted  that  there  was  waiting  for  him 
somewhere  in  the  American  Church  a  place  either  as 
an  assistant  in  a  large  parish  or  as  rector  in  a  small 
one,  or  as  missionary  at  some  post  where  the  Church 
was  ready  to  send  him.  At  that  date  the  bishops 
were  seeking  for  men.  They  were  writing  hither  and 
thither  to  inquire  if  one  might  perchance  know  of  a 
suitable  man  to  fill  such  and  such  a  vacancy.  At  that 
date  the  missionary  bishops  used  to  visit  the  theolog- 
ical schools  in  order  to  secure,  if  possible,  a  promise 
from  members  of  the  junior  class  that  they  would  go 
to  their  jurisdictions  three  years  later.  Now  the  whole 
situation  is  changed.  What  has  caused  the  change  ? 
What  will  cure  it  ? 

These  are  large  and  very  difficult  questions.  If  I 
venture  to  state  some  thin(''s  \v"hich  seem  to  me  to  be 


42  CHURCH   AND    CLEEGY 

the  causes,  I  trust  that  it  Avill  not  be  regarded  as  an 
impertinence.  It  is  only  an  expression  of  opinion, 
after  all,  and  one  man's  opinion  is  as  free  as  another's. 
If  any  one  can  point  out  causes  which  will  appear 
more  real  than  those  I  suggest,  I  shall  be  only  too 
glad  to  withdraw  my  own  and  to  accept  his. 

Probably  the  chief  cause  of  the  condition  of  things 
now  existing  is  one  which  is  not  confined  to  us.  It  is 
operating  with  bewildering  rapidity  in  the  whole 
United  States.  It  is  that  sweeping  change  which  is 
going  on  in  the  religious  habits  of  the  people.  For 
many  centuries  the  Church  has  encircled  a  multitude 
of  "nominal  adherents,"  probably  larger  than  the 
number  of  the  disciples.  From  Constantine's  time 
until  within  our  own  generation  the  Church  has  been 
supported  in  large  part  by  the  money  of  those  who 
never  were  Christians.  During  many  centuries,  and 
throughout  the  Christian  world,  this  money  came  in 
as  the  proceeds  of  a  general  tax  levy.  People  paid  for 
the  Church,  just  as  to-day  they  pay  for  the  public 
schools,  whether  they  cared  or  did  not  care  to  use  it. 
When  Church  and  State  were  separated,  as  in  the 
United  States,  these  same  nominal  Christians  contin- 
ued for  a  long  time  to  do  from  use  and  wont  what 
they  had  previously  done  by  legal  mandate.  They  at- 
tended church  with  more  or  less  regularity,  and  they 
contributed  toward  its  support.  Public  opinion  com- 
pelled them.  To  have  no  "  church  connection  "  was  a 
social  stigma.     So,  too,  to  be  an  habitual  non-church- 


CHURCH   AND    CLERGY  43 

goer  gave  suspicion  of  moral  obliquity.     There  was  a 
feeling  in  the  community  that  any  man  might  reason- 
ably be  called  upon  to  help  build  or  support  a  church, 
whether  he  was  a  member  of  the  church  or  not.     The 
banker,  the  politician,  the  society  man,  even  the  gam- 
bler in  a  mining  camp,  responded  to  this  social  coer- 
cion.    They  do  so  yet,  but  in  a  lessening  degree.     "We 
are  within  sight  of  the  time  when  they  will  not  do  so 
at  all.     When  the  Church  asked  for  a  complete  sepa- 
ration from  the  State  she  did  not  altogether  realize 
how    complete   that  separation  would  become.     She 
thought    only   of   separating  from   institutions   with 
which  she  had  no  part.     It  ends  by  separating  from 
multitudes  of  people  who  had  no  part  with  her.     Our 
own  Church  will  suffer  more  by  this  falling  away  than 
will  any  other.     We  have  had  a  far  larger  proportion 
in   the  congregation  who   are  not  members  of  the 
Church   than   has  any  other.     They  have  been  con- 
tributors,  workers,  vestrymen.     But   the   time   is   in 
sight  when  they  will  be  so  no  longer.     Their  falling 
away  is  not  an  apostasy.     Nor  is  it  the  result  of  any 
decadence  in  the  morals  of  the  people  who  once  were 
in  our  churches  and  now  are  not.     It  is  simply  due  to 
the  fact  that  now  society  has  taken  the  ground  that 
some  "  church  connection "  is  not  necessary  to  social 
standing  or  to  moral  respectability.     The  Church  is 
rapidly  returning  to  the  position  in  which  it  was  in  the 
primitive  ages.     Then,  the  most  it  hoped  for  was  to 
be  let  alone.     Then  Constantine  came  and  gave  it  rich 


44  CHURCH   AND    CLERGY 

donations — but  did  not  join  it.  Now  he  is  about  to 
withdraw,  and  we  will  no  more  have  the  contributions 
of  him  or  his  kind.  That  this  change  in  the  situation 
has  come  about  so  suddenly  will  surprise  no  one  who 
studies  the  history  of  social  movements.  It  is  just  the 
action  which  Protestantism  has  been  preparing  for 
during  four  centuries.  It  took  a  long  time  to  get 
ready  for  the  movement.  Our  own  generation  will 
probably  be  long  enough  for  the  action  itself.  This 
goes  far  to  account  for  the  present  excess  of  clergy 
everywhere.  The  supply  was  adjusted  to  a  condition 
of  things  which  endured  up  to  hardly  more  than 
twenty  years  ago,  but  which  is  well-nigh  gone  to-day. 

It  is  with  unfeigned  reluctance  and  real  trepida- 
tion that  I  go  on  to  point  out  some  causes  of  cler- 
ical indigence  which,  in  my  judgment,  operate  par- 
ticularly within  our  own  Church.  I  know  that  many 
will  disagree  with  me,  and  that  some  may  take  um- 
brage. I  can  only  plead  that  if  what  I  say  shall  prove 
to  be  the  truth,  it  ought  to  be  said.  If  it  be  not  true, 
it  will  hurt  no  one. 

I  would  name,  first,  therefore,  the  enormous  ad- 
vance of  the  '''•  jpriestly''''  conception  of  the  ministry 
which  has  come  in  within  the  last  quarter  of  a  cen- 
tury. The  "  Oxford  Movement "  has  something  to  its 
credit,  but  it  has  much  also  to  its  debit  side.  "Wher- 
ever it  has  gained  control  in  any  area,  in  that  area 
the  clergy  are  poorly  paid.  And  not  only  so,  but  in 
the  same  places  the  gifts  of  the  laity  for  Church  propa- 


CHURCH   AND   CLERGY  45 

gation  are  most  meagre.  If  any  one  will  look  over 
the  list  of  the  parishes  which  sustain  the  Board  of 
Missions  he  will  see  the  truth  of  this.  There  is  only 
one  conspicuous  exception,  and  that  a  brilliant  one, 
where  in  a  great  parish  the  priests  are  paid  by  the 
dead  hand  of  men  who  while  they  lived,  thought  little 
of  priests.  Speaking  generally,  the  parishes  and 
dioceses  wherein  the  "  priestly "  idea  has  been  most 
completely  exploited  are  those  where  the  laity  are 
least  willing  to  give  the  priest  a  living  salary.  The 
bishop  of  the  diocese  in  which  that  idea  has  been  al- 
lowed its  freest  course  says,  in  his  last  convention  ad- 
dress :  "  We  have  been  in  the  diocese  twenty  j'-ears, 
and  in  only  a  single  instance  has  a  missionary  ap- 
propriation been  voluntarily  surrendered."  Of  course, 
it  is  open  to  the  priest  to  retort :  "  So  much  the  more 
shame  to  the  laity  for  forgetting  the  apostolic  in- 
junction that  they  who  preach  the  gospel  should  live 
by  the  gospel."  Maybe  so.  But  suppose  the  laity 
should  reply  :  "  If  you  will  try  for  a  while  to  preach 
the  gospel  we  will  try  to  see  that  you  do  live ! "  A 
man  is  only  paid  for  the  thing  which  he  does.  If  he 
be  thoroughly  equipped  to  perform  sacerdotal  func- 
tions, an  equipment  procured,  maybe,  at  great  cost  of 
labor,  of  study  and  practice,  and  find  that  so  small  a 
percentage  of  the  community  Avant  the  things  which 
he  has  to  give  sufficiently  to  pay  for  them,  what  is  he 
to  say  ?  He  may  say  :  "  They  are  precious  things, 
men  ought  to  want  them ;  they  ought  to  gladly  wel- 


46  CHURCH   AND   CLERGY 

come  and  honor  the  man  who  brings  them."  Maybe 
so,  again.  But  it  may  be  worth  while  to  remind  him 
that  the  men  to  whom  he  would  thus  speak  are  not 
within  the  sound  of  his  voice.  I  am  constrained  to 
believe  that  the  exploitation  of  the  priestly  at  the  ex- 
pense of  the  prophetic  side  of  the  ministerial  office, 
with  the  dogmatism,  pettiness,  hardness,  and  super- 
ciliousness which  so  often  attend  thereupon,  will  go 
far  to  explain  why  the  laity  are  slow  to  pay  living 
stipends.  Surely  there  must  be  some  explanation  of 
the  fact  that  so  many  priests  of  blameless  life,  of  burn- 
ing zeal,  of  tireless  activity,  are  so  insufficiently  main- 
tained while  they  do  their  offices. 

The  second  cause  in  order,  though  possibly  the  first 
in  influence,  is  the  spread  of  the  "  Free  Church  Idea." 
It  is  a  source  of  congratulation  to  the  advocates  of 
that  idea  that  something  like  eighty-five  per  cent,  of 
our  churches  are  "  free."  The  root  principle  of  the 
free  church  propaganda  is  that  the  attendant  at  a 
Christian  church  cannot  rightly  have  his  attendance 
made  conditional  upon  his  agreeing  to  pay  any  fixed 
sum  toward  the  support  of  the  Church.  This  is  the 
heart  of  the  contention,  I  do  not  propose  to  contro- 
vert the  claim  farther  than  to  say  that  it  seems  to  me 
to  rest  upon  an  astonishing  confusion  of  ideas.  To 
argue  that  because  the  gospel  is  free,  therefore 
churclies  should  be  free,  is  like  arguing  that  because 
Avater  is  free,  therefore  men  should  not  be  required  to 
pay  taxes  for  the  water  they  draw  from  the  hydrant. 


CHURCH   AND   CLERGY  47 

But  what  I  call  attention  to  is  the  effect  which  has 
been  produced  upon  the  people  b}'^  twenty-five  years' 
preaching  of  this  demoralizing  error.  I  am  quite 
aware  that  experience  has  taught  the  folly  of  it  in 
many  cases.  In  my  own  city  two  of  the  most  con- 
spicuous "  free "  churches  have  abandoned  their 
theory,  and  a  third  and  more  conspicuous  parish  would 
gladly  do  so  if  it  could.  But  the  mischief  has  been 
done.  For  a  quarter  of  a  century  the  propaganda  has 
been  carried  forward.  By  sermons,  episcopal  charges, 
addresses,  tracts,  periodicals,  it  has  been  dinned  into 
the  people's  ears  that  the  Church  ought  to  be  free, 
that  to  make  any  financial  condition  of  attendance  is 
wrong,  selfish,  anti-Christian.  Is  it  any  wonder  that 
the  people  have  come  to  believe  what  they  have  been 
so  diligently  taught  ?  Is  it  surprising  if  they  better 
their  instruction  ?  I  would  have  it  understood  that  I 
am  not  making  an  argument  for  pewed  churches. 
The  antithesis  of  the  "free  church"  is  not  "  the  pew 
church,"  it  is  any  church  wherein  the  attendant  has 
the  amount  which  he  shall  pay  for  his  place  fixed  for 
him  by  the  Church,  and  not  left  to  his  own  whim  from 
day  to  day.  It  is  probably  true  that  there  are  few 
really  free  churches — that  is,  churches  which  actually 
depend  upon  the  free-will  offerings  of  the  people  at 
the  services.  But  that  is  not  the  point.  The  point  is 
that  there  are  hundreds  in  which  that  is  held  before 
the  people  as  the  ideal  of  what  ought  of  right  to  be. 
This  is  where  the  mischief  is  done.     It  is  not  that  a 


48  CHURCH   AND    CLERGY 

free  church  here  and  there  gives  its  priest  a  meagre  sup- 
port and  can  rarely  spare  an  offertory  for  any  object 
outside  itself.  It  is  that  the  people  have  their  sense  of 
responsibility  debauched  by  the  display  of  a  false  ideal. 
From  the  organization  of  the  American  Church  up 
to  about  twenty-five  years  ago,  the  missions  started 
almost  invariably  passed  on,  and  passed  on  quickly  to 
become  self-supporting  parishes.  A  group  of  Church 
people  in  a  new  town,  or  in  a  new  portion  of  a  city, 
drew  together,  grew  larger,  built  a  church  for  them- 
selves, called  a  minister  for  themselves,  and  paid 
for  all  themselves.  When  I  say  built  a  church  for 
themselves^  I  mean  that.  They  were  the  owners,  and 
being  the  owners  they  could  exercise  hospitality.  But 
the  visitor  came  within  their  gates  as  a  visitor,  and 
not  as  one  who,  they  feared,  might  rebuke  them  for 
not  waiving  their  own  rights  and  declaring  the  house 
free  alike  to  all.  But  the  simple  fact  is,  that  while 
this  way  prevailed  the  Church  did  grow,  it  organized 
new  parishes,  they  became  self-sustaining,  and  they 
paid  their  clergy.  Why  is  it  that  so  many  scores  of 
missions  and  parishes,  started  within  the  last  quarter 
century,  remain  a  burden  on  the  Church  at  large  ?  In 
multitudes  of  towns  and  cities  the  conditions  have  been 
far  more  favorable  than  were  the  early  conditions  of 
the  parishes  which  are  now  called  upon  to  help  them. 
I  believe  that  one  will  go  far  to  explain  the  evils  of 
the  present  situation  Avhen  he  says  that  there  has 
spread  abroad  a  well-mcuut  but  mischievous  spirit  of 


CHURCH   AND   CLERGY  49 

ecclesiastical  communism  Avhich  bids  fair  to  convert 
the  churches  of  this  land  into  sturdy  beggars.  It  is 
paralyzing  the  efforts  of  the  bishops,  it  is  starving  the 
clergy  and  deteriorating  the  manly  fibre  of  the  laity. 

And  now,  things  being  as  they  are,  might  it  not  be 
wisest  to  look  for  relief  to  a  celibate  clergy?  That 
this  idea  is  in  the  minds  of  many  of  the  bishops  is 
evident  from  their  replies.  They  are  practical  men 
and  are  confronted  with  immediate  necessities.  It 
should  not  be  surprising  if  they  snatch  at  the  relief 
which  seems  to  lie  nearest  to  hand.  Certainly  an  un- 
married man  can  live  upon  less  than  can  a  family. 
He  can  go  where  he  is  sent.  He  is  more  amenable  to 
discipline.  These  two  considerations,  a  clergy  more 
easily  maintained,  and  the  bishop's  desire  to  possess 
the  "  power  of  mission,"  lead  not  a  few  of  our  bishops 
(themselves  having  families)  to  look  in  this  direction, 
and  lead  a  few  of  them  to  advocate  that  way. 

They  had  better  first  count  the  cost.  A  celibate 
clergy  is  an  institution  of  quite  incalculable  potency. 
It  is  the  one  thing  which  gives  the  Koman  Church  its 
power.  Change  that,  and  the  Eoman  Church  would 
fall  to  pieces.  There  is  an  army  of  loose-footed  janis- 
saries Avho  can  never  fix  themselves  by  bonds  of  com- 
mon life  and  affection  at  any  point  in  human  society. 
They  are,  therefore,  always  to  be  depended  upon  to 
carry  out  the  will  of  their  superiors.  But  the  hu- 
man soul  cannot  live  without  affection.  The  celibate 
priest  among  us  (I  do  not  mean  the  unmarried  priest,) 


50  CHUKCH   AND   CLERGY 

gives  his  heart  to  his  Order.  It  is  true  that  he  "vvill 
obey  his  bishop,  provided  his  bishop  be  one  of  his  own 
kind,  and  provided  farther  that  tliere  be  round  about 
him  a  discipline  vigorous  enough  to  protect  tlie  celi- 
bate from  himself  and  to  protect  the  Church  from 
complicity  with  him  in  his  faults.  If  the  Church 
should  determine  soberly  that  a  celibate  clergy  is  the 
practical  answer  to  a  practical  problem,  and  should 
adopt  the  system  together  with  the  discipline  neces- 
sary to  safeguard  it,  the  most  that  could  be  said  would 
be  that  this  Church  would  then  be  transformed  into 
something  quite  unlike  to  what  it  is  now  and  ever  has 
been.  A  different  kind  of  men  would  1111  her  ministry, 
and  the  kind  of  laymen  we  have  known  heretofore 
would  disappear  from  her.  Still,  the  new  institution 
might  remain  respectable. 

But  if,  on  the  other  hand,  celibacy  shall,  unnoticed 
and  unregulated,  come  to  prevail  without  that  stern 
discipline  which  in  Rome  avails  at  least  to  maintain 
outward  decency,  then,  and  in  that  case,  the  clergy 
and  the  laity  of  the  type  which  have  borne  the 
Church's  fortunes  thus  far  may  quietly  prepare  for  re- 
moval from  an  institution  which  should  have  so  far 
transformed  itself  that  they  could  no  longer  recognize 
it,  or  safely  remain  within  it. 

In  any  case,  it  may  be  w^ell  to  be  reminded  that  the 
"  Power  of  Mission,"  of  which  some  bisliops  are  dream- 
ing, is  quite  impossible.  Beside  the  fact  that  it  is  not 
Catholic,  nor  primitive,  nor  American,  and  beside  the 


CHURCH   AND   CLERGY  51 

fact  that  neither  clergy  nor  laity  either  would  or 
ought  to  submit  to  it,  and  beside  the  fact  that  many 
bishops  are  utterly  unfit  to  exercise  it,  this  Church  of 
ours  is  barred  from  adopting  it  by  the  law  of  honor 
and  good  faith.  Among  the  list  of  "Fundamental 
Rights  and  Liberties,"  unanimously  accepted  as  the 
basis  upon  which  the  Convention  which  framed  the 
Constitution  should  act,  is  the  provision  that  the  ap- 
pointment of  clergy  to  cures  should  always  rest  with 
the  laity.  For  this  Church  that  matter  is  settled,  until 
and  unless  she  should  be  willing  to  break  pledged  faith. 

But  what,  then  ?  Here  there  are  but  two  places  in 
the  United  States  at  this  moment  open  for  a  man  who 
cannot  live  upon  less  than  a  thousand  dollars  a  year 
and  a  rectory,  while  more  than  one-half  of  our  clergy 
receive  less  than  that.     What  shall  we  do  ? 

I  reply,  first,  realize  the  fact.  Second,  seek  for  the 
cause.  Third,  let  candidates  for  Orders  know  the 
facts.  This  will  be  a  fan  to  winnow  them.  Those 
who  are  conscious  of  possessing  the  strength  and 
enthusiasm  to  go  out  and  make  a  place,  each  man  for 
himself,  will  go,  and  will  bless  and  be  blessed. 

Nor  need  we  pass  over  silentl}^  the  petition,  "  Send 
forth  laborers  into  Thy  harvest."  "  Laborers  "  and 
"  clergy  "  are  not  synonymous.  There  be  laborers 
who  are  not  clergymen ;  and  there  be  clergymen,  I 
trow,  who  are  not  laborers.  Multitudes  of  laborers 
are  needed  in  every  nook  and  corner  of  the  vineyard, 
but  they  need  not  be  ordained. 


ABOUT  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARIES 


Ill 

ABOUT  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINAEIES 

If  we  were  altogether  without  any  system  of  theo- 
logical education,  it  would  probably  not  be  difficult 
for  wise  men  to  put  their  heads  together  and  arrange 
one  which  would  be  satisfactory.  Unfortunately, 
however,  we  have  one  already  occupying  the  ground, 
but  one  which  is  confessed  on  all  hands  not  to  be 
what  we  would  be  glad  to  have  it.  I  do  not  think  I 
have  ever  heard  any  clergyman  speak  with  entire  con- 
tentment of  our  system  of  theological  training.  Nor 
have  I  ever  found  one  who  has  looked  back  upon  his 
own  course  in  the  seminary  with  the  same  satisfaction 
with  which  he  looks  back  upon  his  course  in  the  uni- 
versity, or  with  which  the  law3'er  or  the  doctor  or  the 
engineer  looks  back  upon  his  years  in  his  professional 
school.  I  therefore  venture  to  criticise  our  present 
system,  because  while  I  recognize  distinctly  that  it 
has  in  it  many  elements  of  good,  and  that  there  are 
connected  with  it  scholars  and  devoted  men  at  whose 
feet  I  am  not  worthy  to  sit,  nevertheless,  I  think  it  is 
well  that  men  should  speak  out  frankly  the  things 
which  they  think,  and  so  give  an  opportunity  to  other 
men  who  think  differently  to  say  their  say  with  equal 
plainness. 

55 


56  ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL   SEMIXAKIES 

The  charges  which  I  venture  to  bring  against  our 
present  system,  of  training  men  for  the  ministry  are, 
first^  that  it  does  not  tend  to  secure  the  right  kind  of 
men ;  second,  that  it  does  not  train  them  efficiently 
for  the  purpose  they  have  in  view ;  third,  that  it  costs 
far  too  much  money. 

In  looking  about  for  the  explanation  of  these  evils, 
which  are,  at  least  in  part,  acknowledged  by  every 
one,  the  root  of  the  matter  would  seem  to  be  in  the 
fact  of  our  general  confusion  as  to  precisely  what  the 
ministry  is.  The  Church,  in  the  nature  of  the  case, 
can  never  prepare  any  man  for  the  ministry  unless 
she  have  in  mind  precisely"  what  the  nature  of  the  of- 
fice and  work  is  for  which  she  is  trying  to  fit  him. 
What,  then,  are  we  attempting  to  produce  in  our 
theological  seminaries  ?  Is  it  masters  of  ritual  cere- 
monial ?  is  it  directors  of  men's  consciences  ?  is  it 
forceful  advocates  ?  is  it  skillful  executives  ?  or  is  it  a 
combination  of  all  of  these  ?  It  will  be  readily  seen 
that  the  method  of  training  which  would  secure  one 
of  these  results  is  a  method  which  cannot  by  any 
possibility  produce  the  others. 

Now,  to  clear  the  ground  here,  let  us  look  back  to 
the  beginning  and  see  what  the  idea  of  the  ministry 
was  which  was  practically  accepted  and  acted  upon  in 
the  earliest  days  of  the  Church.  It  is  evident  at  a 
glance  that  all  those  purposes  named  above,  if  they 
were  present  at  all  in  the  minds  of  the  earliest  apos- 
tles, were  present  only  as  subsidiary  to  another  pur- 


ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARIES  57 

pose  ^vliich  was  to  be  reached  in  a  different  way. 
The  earliest  ministers  of  Christ  regarded  themselves 
as  the  bearers  of  a  very  plain  and  simple  message  :  it 
was  the  declaration  of  the  fact  of  the  Cross  of  Christ 
as  a  method  of  living,  and  of  the  Resurrection  as  a 
new  motive  for  right  living.  The  men  themselves 
were  all  men  without  special  training  as  priests,  dea- 
cons, pastors,  or  executives.  It  is  a  very  significant 
fact  that  from  the  "  multitudes  of  priests "  (and  we 
may  add  scribes  also)  "who  were  added  to  the 
Church  "  not  a  single  one  appears  to  have  entered  its 
ministry.  Their  previous  training  and  qualification 
for  official  work  in  an  ecclesiastical  organization  seem 
all  to  have  gone  for  nothing,'  and  a  different  kind  of 
men  were  selected,  with  different  qualifications.  And 
we  may  say,  in  passing,  that  the  success  of  the  early 
preachers  of  the  gospel  and  administrators  of  the 
Church  was  at  least  fairly  good. 

When  we  pass  from  the  earliest  days  of  the  Church 
into  its  patristic  period,  we  find  that  exactly  the  same 
ideas  prevailed  concerning  the  preparation  for  the 
ministry.  Justin  Martyr,  for  example,  was  an  Ori- 
ental Greek  philosopher,  and  he  passed  at  once  from 
his  professional  work  to  the  work  of  the  ministry. 
Of  the  early  education  of  Irenteus  nothing  is  known. 
Cyprian  was  an  educated  Latin  gentleman,  knowing 
no  tongue  but  his  own,  and  with  no  previous  training 
in  technical  theology.  Origen  was  a  lecturer  of 
theology  at  the  age  of  eighteen;  and  when  in  later 


58  ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARIES 

years  he  did  subject  himself  to  a  regular  course  of 
theological  training,  he  unfortunately  became  a  here- 
tic. Athanasius  had  a  common  school  education,  and 
learned  his  theology  himself.  Gregory  I^azianzen 
had  established  his  reputation  as  a  grammarian, 
mathematician,  and  rhetorician,  and  passed  from  that 
at  once  into  the  ministry.  Jerome  prepared  himself 
by  the  study  of  the  pagan  Greek  and  Roman  classics. 
Basil  was  a  professional  philosopher,  Augustine  a 
professional  rhetorician.  Ambrose  was  a  lawyer, 
made  a  bishop  eight  days  after  he  was  baptized. 
The  only  one  among  them  all  who  seems  to  have  had 
a  careful  scientific  theological  training  before  be- 
ginning his  ministry  was  Arius  ! 

This  general  ideal  of  the  preparation  for  the  min- 
istry passed  on  into  the  Middle  Ages.  Alcuin  was  a 
classicist.  Anselm  was  a  merchant ;  Bernard  had  the 
training  of  a  knight  and  a  noble.  Thomas  Aquinas' 
preparatory  studies  were  in  Aristotle  and  Dionysius 
the  Areopagite.     Calvin  was  a  lawyer. 

Among  the  masters  of  English  theology  the  same 
idea  of  preparation  prevailed.  Bishop  Barrow  was  a 
})rofessor  of  Greek  and  mathematics,  up  to  the  time 
of  his  ordination.  Bishop  Andrews  was  master  of 
Pembroke  Hall,  Cambridge.  Jeremy  Tajdor  won  his 
fellowship  in  the  classics.     And  so  generally. 

Wlien  one  looks  for  the  reason  of  the  wonderful 
efficiency  of  the  men  whose  names  occur  in  this  long 
roll  of  apostles,  fathers,  and  theologians,  two  or  three 


ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARIES  59 

explanations  occur.  The  first  and  most  evident  one 
is  that  their  "  vocation  "  to  tlie  ministry  came  to  them 
in  every  case  when  they  were  full-grown  men,  with 
the  knowledge  of  life  and  men,  and  with  the  oppor- 
tunity to  accurately  estimate  their  own  powers. 
They  left  their  nets,  their  counting  houses  their 
schools, — in  which  they  had  already  attained  success, 
— and  became  the  ambassadors  of  Jesus  Christ. 

The  second  is  that  they  proceeded  at  once  to  use  the 
faculties  and  qualifications  which  they  had  already 
possessed  and  had  tried  and  tested  in  the  actual  con- 
duct of  their  lives. 

The  third  is  that  they  were  chosen  and  called  by  the 
bishops  and  the  congregations,  and  were  not  volun- 
teers. 

Now,  it  is  but  fair  to  say  that  the  operation  of  that 
law  which  Mr.  Spencer  calls  the  "differentiation  of 
function  "  has  had  its  place  in  the  Church  as  well  as  in 
society  and  in  the  physical  world.  To  a  certain  point 
the  legitimate  operation  of  this  law  upon  the  prepara- 
tion of  men  for  the  ministry  of  the  Church  must  be 
allowed.  But  our  contention  is  that  it  has  been  per- 
mitted to  operate  to  an  extent  which  has  practically 
reversed  or  destroyed  some  of  the  fundamental  princi- 
ples upon  which  the  choice  of  men  for  the  ministry 
and  their  preparation  therefor  should  proceed. 

First  of  all,  as  things  are  with  us,  any  man  who  ex- 
pects to  be  ordained  priest  at  twenty -four  must  settle 
his  vocation  not  later  than  at  the  age  of  nineteen ;  in 


60  ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINAKIES 

other  words,  he  must  determine  while  he  is  yet  a  boy 
whether  or  not  he  intends  as  a  man  to  devote  his  life 
to  the  ministry.  This  is  the  necessary  condition  of 
things,  of  course,  in  every  other  profession.  The  de- 
mands of  each  profession  have  become  so  exacting  that 
the  technical  training  therefor  has  been  greatly 
lengthened  out ;  so  that  any  man  who  wishes  to  enter 
the  profession  must  determine  upon  it  a  long  while  in 
advance.  But  the  ministry  will  not  stand  upon  the 
ground  of  a  "  profession."  It  is  not  a  profession  :  it  is 
a  vocation.  The  whole  theory  of  the  Church  is  that 
this  vocation  comes  to  a  man  when  he  is  a  man,  and 
comes  to  him  with  such  imperious  command  that  he 
dare  not  refuse  it.  With  us  ninety-nine  per  cent,  of 
Christian  men  are  practically  forbidden  to  obey  this 
vocation.  Not  long  ago  one  of  the  most  eloquent  and 
devoted  of  our  bishops  made  an  address  in  my  church 
upon  Domestic  Missions.  He  closed  with  an  impress- 
ive appeal  to  the  men  present,  by  their  love  of  God 
and  of  their  country,  to  consider  whether  they  might 
not, — some  of  them  at  any  rate, — like  St.  Matthew, 
leave  their  counting  houses  and  become  ambassadors 
of  Christ.  Now,  suppose  one  of  these  men  had  taken 
the  bishop  at  his  word.  He  is  a  lawyer,  a  merchant, 
an  engineer,  an  architect,  a  man  of  affairs,  or  a  man  of 
leisure.  His  standing  in  the  community  is  high.  He 
has  shown  by  his  success  in  business  his  ability  to  deal 
with  men  and  things.  By  his  offer  of  himself  he  shows 
his  devotion.     He  is  thirty-five  years  old  and  has  a 


ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARIES  61 

family  which  he  rules  well.  The  Church  is  praying : 
"  Lord,  send  forth  laborers  into  Thy  harvest."  Here  is 
a  laborer  ready.  He  offers  himself.  What  does  the 
Church  say  to  him  ?  She  says :  My  dear  brother,  it 
will  take  you  four  years,  at  least,  to  be  able  to  pass 
the  Standing  Committee.  It  is  enough  for  him.  And 
it  ought  to  be  enough.  He  turns  away ;  and  the 
Church  goes  again  upon  her  knees,  and  wails  in  solemn 
litany  :  "  Lord,  send  forth  laborers  into  Thy  harvest." 

Then  you  can,  if  you  will,  set  over  against  this  the 
fact  that  four  hundred  priests,  who  possess  precisely 
the  learning  in  which  our  friend  who  sadly  turns  away 
is  wanting,  are  ""  unemployed "  and  can  hardly  get 
their  bread. 

The  explanation  of  all  this  is  that,  while  we  rightly 
insist  upon  having  "  educated  "  men  in  the  ministry, 
we  insist  u])on  an  artificial  kind  of  education.  Even 
as  late  as  fifty  years  ago  the  phrase  "  an  educated 
man  "  was  one  which  was  perfectly  well  understood. 
It  meant,  Avith  us,  a  man  who  had  gone  through  col- 
lege, studied  Greek,  Latin,  mathematics,  natural  philos- 
ophy, and  the  humanities.  But  since  that  time  the 
majority  of  educated  men  have  not  been  trained  along 
these,  but  upon  different  lines.  We  continue  to  insist, 
however,  that  for  our  purpose  no  man  is  an  educated 
man  unless  his  education  has  been  of  this  kind  arbi- 
trarily decreed. 

Side  by  side  with  this  is  the  fact  that  the  person 
whose  natural  and  inalienable  right  it  is  to  make  choice 


62  ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARIES 

of  fit  men  for  the  ministry  has  had  his  rights  taken 
from  him  and  usurped  by  another  power.  Nowhere 
else  in  the  whole  Church  Catholic  is  the  right  of  the 
bishop  to  choose  out  fit  persons  for  the  ministry  and 
to  pass  upon  their  qualifications  questioned.  In  our 
American  Church  this  power  has  been  practically  taken 
from  him  and  lodged  in  the  hands  of  the  Standing  Com- 
mittee. In  the  whole  transaction  neither  the  bishop, 
who  should  select,  nor  the  congregation,  who  should 
choose  out,  has  any  power.  It  is  a  matter  between  the 
candidate  for  Orders  and  the  Standing  Committee. 

Lest  this  assertion  may  be  called  in  question,  I  ven- 
ture to  condense  from  Title  I.  of  the  Digest  precisely 
what  is  the  manner  of  procedure.  When  a  man  thinks 
of  "  studying  for  the  ministry,"  he  is  first  directed  to 
consult  his  rector.  If  the  rector  thinks  well  of  it,  he 
can  go  to  the  bishop.  If  the  rector  does  not  think 
well  of  it,  he  can  go  to  the  bishop  all  the  same.  Upon 
his  arrival,  the  bishop  is  instructed  to  -dsk  him,  Jirst, 
whether  he  has  ever  applied  elsewhere  ;  second,  whether 
he  is  ready  to  pass  his  examinations ;  third,  when  and 
where  he  was  baptized,  confirmed,  and  received  his 
first  communion.  If  he  is  able  to  answer  all  these 
inquiries  satisfactorily,  the  bishop  is  canonically  re- 
quired—to make  a  note  of  it.  That  is  all.  At 
this  stage  the  canons  declare  that  in  the  absence  of  a 
bishop  the  Standing  Committee  can  do  it  all  just  as 
well.  But  now  the  real  business  of  the  young  man 
commences.     The   bishop  may  know  him,   and   love 


ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL    SEMINARIES  63 

him,  and  be  fain  to  ordain  him,  but  that  goes  for  noth- 
ing. He  must  now  "  apply  to  the  Standing  Commit- 
tee for  recommendation  to  the  bishop  for  admission  as 
a  candidate."  He  must  bring  to  the  Standing  Com- 
mittee a  "  testimonial."  If  he  does  not  bring  this  tes- 
timonial, however,  the  canon  is  careful  to  say  that  the 
Standing  Committee  can  receive  him  all  the  same. 
With  the  recommendation  of  the  Standing  Committee 
in  his  hand  the  young  man  goes  again  to  the  bishop. 
The  canon  evidently  assumes  that  the  bishop  will  obey 
the  godly  admonition  of  the  Standing  Committee  in 
the  premises,  for  at  this  point  it  declares  that  the 
bishop  shall  require  the  young  man  to  declare  whether 
he  intends  to  become  a  candidate  for  priest's  Orders 
or  for  deacon's  Orders  only.  If  the  latter,  the 
bishop  may  now  accept  him.  If  the  former,  the 
bishop  may  not  yet  be  trusted.  He  must  now 
inquire  for  the  young  man's  diploma.  If  there  is 
any  doubt  as  to  its  suiRciency,  the  bishop  is  advised 
to  submit  it  to  the  Standing  Committee  for  their 
consideration.  If  no  diploma  is  forthcoming,  the 
young  man  must  be  turned  over  to  the  examining 
chaplains.  After  all  this  the  bishop  may — not  ordain 
him,  but  admit  him  to  be  a  candidate  for  ordination 
at  some  future  time. 

The  primitive  and  Catholic  theory  is  that  the  bishop 
in  his  quality  of  chief  pastor  shall  be  able  to  know 
who  are  fit  persons  to  enter  the  ministry ;  and  that  in 
the  determination  of  this  question,  he  shall  cooperate 


64  ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINAEIES 

with  the  congregation  who  personally  know  the  man. 
The  organizing  principle  about  which  our  Church  re- 
volves is  the  episcopate ;  and  the  one  peculiar  power 
of  the  episcopate  is  the  power  of  ordination.  For  this 
we  believe  that  office  has  a  divine  sanction.  To  insist, 
therefore,  that  the  bishop  shall  be  forbidden  to  exer- 
cise the  one  function  which  is  peculiar  to  him,  without 
the  consent  and  recommendation  of  another  power  un- 
known both  to  the  primitive  and  to  the  Catholic 
Church,  is  simply  a  solemn  trifling,  which  the  world 
will  sooner  or  later  find  out.  May  we  not  hope  that 
the  bishops  may  some  time  pluck  up  the  courage  to 
resist  that  steady  encroachment  upon  their  inherent 
prerogatives  which  has  marked  the  action  of  that 
house  of  clerical  and  lay  deputies  which  now  for  some 
time  has  strangely  fancied  that  it  is  the  Church  ? 

Another  charge  which  may  fairly  be  brought  against 
our  present  method  is  that  it  is  inefficient  even  within 
the  arbitrary,  artificial  lines  which  it  has  set.  There 
are  very  few  young  men  to  whom  it  is  possible  to 
secure  a  first-rate,  or  even  a  second-rate,  university 
education  in  the  department  of  the  humanities,  and 
still  have  the  time  and  the  money  to  spare  for  a  three- 
years'  theological  course.  It  is  true  that  a  large  num- 
ber of  our  theological  students  write  A.  B.  after  their 
names.  From  an  examination  of  the  catalogues  of  a 
dozen  of  our  seminaries  I  should  think  that  about  fifty 
per  cent,  have  the  right  to  do  so.  A  little  closer  ex- 
amination, however,  will  discover  the  fact  that  these 


ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARIES  65 

bachelors'  degrees  have  been  conferred  in  large  num- 
ber by  small,  ill-equipped,  and  unsatisfactory  colleges, 
which  have  arisen  for  the  express  purpose  of  provid- 
ing a  short,  cheap,  and  inadequate  college  training  for 
candidates  for  the  ministry.  I  have  no  fault  to  find 
with  these  colleges  or  with  the  spirit  in  which  they 
conduct  their  work.  As  things  are  with  us,  they 
would  seem  to  be  a  necessity.  The  time  and  expense 
necessary  for  education  in  a  first-rate  college  or  uni- 
versity are  beyond  the  unaided  means  of  most  candi- 
dates for  the  ministry.  If  the  Church,  therefore,  in- 
sists that  they  shall  have  in  advance  a  particular  kind 
of  education,  and  will  accept  no  other  kind,  it  is  but 
natural  and  proper  that  she  should  provide  the  ma- 
chinery to  give  them  this  education.  But  the  Church 
should  not  allow  herself  to  be  deceived  any  more  than 
the  world  at  large  is  actually  deceived  with  regard  to 
the  matter.  The  educated  world  is  not  deceived  at 
all ;  it  knows  exactly  what  this  collegiate  education  is 
worth  and  what  it  is  not.  It  may  be  alleged,  without 
much  fear  of  contradiction,  that  the  work  done  within 
our  theological  seminaries  themselves  does  not  compare 
in  earnestness  or  efficiency  with  the  work  done  in  the 
technical  schools  where  men  are  being  fitted  for  other 
professions.  In  preparing  this  paper  I  have  had  be- 
fore me  the  rosters  for  the  middle  year  of  students 
in  probably  our  best  divinity  school,  an  average  medi- 
cal school,  and  an  average  law  school.  In  the  medical 
school  the  lectures  Avhich  the  students  of  that  year 


66  ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINAKIES 

are  bound  to  attend  take  twenty-seven  hours  a  week. 
These  lectures  are  upon  the  most  exact  subjects,  which 
require  the  utmost  precision  and  accuracy  of  work. 
In  addition  to  these  twenty-seven  hours  required  at 
least  six  more  hours  are  bound  to  be  spent  in  dis- 
section and  at  clinics.  The  authorities  of  the  school 
are  bowelless.  The  student  must  do  his  work  and  pass 
his  examinations  without  any  regard  to  his  attractive 
or  unattractive  personal  qualities,  or  he  cannot  re- 
ceive his  diploma.  In  the  corresponding  law  school 
the  roster  shows  a  requirement  of  twenty-nine  hours  a 
week  at  lectures  ;  and  the  dean  of  the  school  informs 
me  that  it  is  not  possible  for  any  student  to  pass  his 
final  examinations  and  receive  his  degree  unless  he 
adds  to  this  at  least  ten  hours  a  week.  In  both  these 
schools, — as  I  have  had  the  opportunity  personally  to 
observe, — the  student  is  compelled  to  work,  work, 
work  ;  and  his  final  passage  depends  upon  whether  he 
actually  has  or  has  not  done  the  work.  In  the  corre- 
sponding divinity  school  the  second-year  men  are 
called  upon  to  attend  seventeen  hours  of  lectures. 
The  studies  with  which  they  are  engaged  are  not 
studies  of  precision.  It  depends  upon  the  student 
himself  largely  as  to  how  much  or  hoAV  little  work  he 
shall  perform.  I  am  constrained  to  believe  that  he 
works  not  much  more  than  half  as  many  hours  during 
his  year  as  the  student  in  either  of  these  other  schools, 
and  that  his  work  is  done  with  less  than  half  the  ac- 
curacy and  thoroughness. 


ABOUT   TUEOLOGICAL    SEMINARIES  67 

The  only  consoling  reflection  at  this  stage  is  that 
when  one  looks  over  the  course  of  study  set  before  the 
student  in  some  of  our  seminaries  it  is  just  as  well  that 
he  does  not  spend  too  much  time  upon  it.  For  example, 
in  one  of  our  most  widely  known  schools  the  text- 
books in  dogmatic  theology  for  two  whole  years  are 
Pearson  on  the  Creed,  Percival's  "  Digest  of  Theol- 
ogy," and  Butler's  "  Analogy " ;  and  for  collateral 
illumination  the  students  are  directed  to  the 
"  Summa  "  of  St.  Thomas,  St.  Leo  on  the  Incarnation, 
the  "  Catechetical  Lectures  "  of  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem, 
McLaren's  "  Catholic  Dogma  the  Antidote  of  Doubt "  ; 
and  the  only  book  upon  evidences  is  Paley's !  It  is  as 
though  the  students  at  "West  Point  should  be  loosely 
trained  in  the  use  of  crossbows  and  jingalls,  and  then 
commissioned  as  officers  in  the  United  States  Army ! 

But  with  the  requirements  being  even  what  they 
are,  it  is  practically  impossible  for  the  great  majority 
of  our  theological  students  to  provide  for  themselves 
the  expense  which  it  entails.  If,  however,  we  accept 
the  decision  of  a  boy  of  nineteen  that  he  shall  pre- 
pare himself,  or  be  prepared,  for  ordination  to  the 
ministry  according  to  the  requirements  which  the 
Church  establishes,  it  is  but  fair  and  right,  from  his 
point  of  view,  that  the  Church  should  provide  for  him 
those  means  which  it  forbids  him  the  opportunity  to 
earn  for  himself.  No  theological  student,  therefore, 
need  feel  shame  or  humiliation  in  being  aided  by  the 
Church  while  he  is  pursuing  his  studies.     But  as  to  the 


68  ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARIES 

effect  of  this  assistance  upon  those  Avho  receive  it,  the 
opinion  of  thoughtful  and  candid  men  is  that,  upon  the 
whole,  it  is  bad.  That,  however,  is  a  subject  too 
delicate  to  be  entered  upon  here. 

Another  charge  which  may  be  brought  against  our 
system  is  that  it  is  disgracefully  expensive.  Our 
"plant"  for  the  education  of  the  theological  students 
as  compared  with  that  for  the  education  of  lawyers  or 
doctors  or  even  engineers  is  at  least  four  times  greater 
in  money  value  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  men 
being  trained  by  it.  At  a  rough  guess  the  property 
of  our  eighteen  theological  seminaries  may  be  put  at 
$6,000,000.  There  are  in  those  seminaries  about  three 
hundred  students.  At  five  per  cent,  upon  the  capital 
invested,  therefore,  the  cost  to  the  Church  annually 
for  the  education  of  each  student  is  $1,000.  To  this  is 
to  be  added  the  whole  expense  for  the  livelihood  of 
the  student  while  in  the  seminary  and  the  support  of 
the  teachers  who  teach  him.  In  those  eighteen  semi- 
naries the  faculties,  not  counting  the  bishops,  include 
sixty-nine  priests.  Their  support  and  salaries  must  be 
added.  There  are  about  three  and  one  quarter  stu- 
dents to  each  professor.  At  the  lowest  calculation 
upon  this  basis,  it  costs  the  Church  $2,000  a  year  for 
the  education  of  each  student.  This  is  at  least  double 
the  cost  for  the  education  of  students  for  other  pro- 
fessions. 

Now,  it  ought  to  go  without  saying  that  there  are 
in  our  seminaries  teachers,  not  a  few,  the  peers  of  any 


ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL    SEMINARIES  69 

teachers  in  any  department  of  learning.  There  are 
students  as  diligent  and  efficient  and  as  capable  as  the 
students  in  any  other  kind  of  institution  of  learning. 
Everybody  knows  that  this  is  true.  But  everybody 
knows,  or  at  least  may  know  if  he  takes  the  trouble 
to  inquire,  that,  speaking  generally,  the  facts  of  the 
situation  are  as  I  have  tried  to  set  them  forth. 

"What,  then,  has  caused  this  unfortunate  condition 
of  affairs,  and  what  can  be  done  by  the  Church  to  re- 
form it  ? 

The  first  cause  would  seem  to  be  that  we  insist  upon 
an  "  educated  "  ministry  without  having  clear  notions 
as  to  what  kind  of  education  is  really  the  kind  which 
will  produce  the  purpose  we  have  in  view.  We  have 
insisted  as  essential  that  the  preliminary  education 
shall  include  Latin  and  Greek  and  Hebrew.  It  is  true 
that  there  are  provisions  for  exemptions  in  certain 
cases  from  each  of  these ;  but  the  simple  fact  that  a 
dispensation  is  required  in  any  case  is  the  proof  that 
in  general  the  requirement  is  fixed.  ISTow,  it  has 
come  about  that  the  great  majority  of  educated  men 
do  not  know  Latin  or  Greek,  to  say  nothing  of  He- 
brew. In  any  large  university  (the  technical  schools 
being  included  in  the  university)  it  will  be  found  that 
the  academic  department  is  far  smaller  numerically 
than  the  other  departments.  Even  within  the  aca- 
demic department  there  are  elective  courses  which  do 
not  include  Latin  or  Greek  and  hardly  ever  include 
Hebrew.     Are  the  men  who  pass  through  these  uni- 


70  ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL    SEMINARIES 

versity  courses  educated  men  or  are  they  not  ?  They 
are  clearly  so  for  every  purpose  except  the  ministry. 
What  is  the  explanation,  then,  of  the  fact  that  we  in- 
sist upon  a  knowledge  of  Latin,  Greek,  and  Hebrew 
as  conditions  precedent  for  the  study  of  theology. 
The  explanation  is  twofold.  First,  it  is  a  survival 
from  a  previous  condition  of  affairs  where  this  particu- 
lar kind  of  knowledge  was  the  badge  of  an  educated 
man.  In  the  second  place,  it  is  the  unconscious  in- 
fluence of  a  theory  concerning  the  place  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures  in  the  Christian  economy  Avhich  this  Church 
of  ours  does  not  hold.  Within  Protestantism  gener- 
ally it  is  assumed  that  the  Bible  is  the  sole  rule  of 
faith  and  practice.  If  this  be  true,  then  any  man  who 
proposes  to  be  a  public  teacher  of  Christianity  must 
be  familiar  most  intimately  with  the  authority.  For 
such  a  man  the  authority  in  its  English  guise  is  not 
sufficient.  He  must  be  able  himself  to  determine  pre- 
cisely what  the  Holy  Scriptures  say  and  do  not  say 
upon  any  question ;  and  this  knowledge  he  can  only 
obtain  for  himself  by  being  able  to  critically  examine 
the  original.  This  theory  of  the  place  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures  the  Catholic  Church  has  never  held  and' our 
Church  does  not  hold.  Nevertheless,  its  influence  has 
obtained  so  widely  that  it  has  affected  our  practical 
methods  even  though  we  disavow  the  theory  itself.  I 
venture  to  say  that  the  efficiency  of  the  ordinary 
Christian  minister  at  the  end  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury depends   hardly  at   all   upon   his  knowledge  of 


ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARIES  Tl 

either  Greek,  Latin,  or  Hebrew ;  and  it  is  well  that  it 
does  not,  for  in  the  vast  majority  of  instances  he  does 
not  possess  this  knowledge,  and  could  not  possess  it  to 
the  necessary  degree  even  if  he  tried.  Where  any 
question  of  Christian  doctrine  hinges  upon  a  critical 
interpretation  of  the  text,  it  is  necessary  to  call  in  the 
services  of  an  expert.  Scholarship  has  become  alto- 
gether too  accurate  and  its  demands  too  exigent  to  be 
met  and  satisfied  by  amateurs. 

But  do  not  misunderstand  me.  No  Church  can  sur- 
YiYe  for  any  great  length  of  time  whose  ministry  does 
not  contain  within  it  the  very  highest  and  best  scholar- 
ship. But  it  does  not  at  all  follow  that  that  scholar- 
ship should  be  equally  distributed  throughout  the 
whole  ministry.  The  Koman  priesthood, — whose 
efficiency  no  one  will  question,  whatever  he  may  think 
of  the  end  toward  which  this  efficiency  is  directed, — 
contains  within  it  scholarship  of  the  very  highest 
order  ;  but  the  priests  who  serve  the  Church  in  the 
field  of  scholarship  are  not  the  same  ones  who  serve 
it  in  the  field  of  its  practical  work.  Our  mistake,  as 
it  seems  to  me,  has  been  to  insist  that  we  should  all 
alike  possess  the  same  qualifications  of  scholarship. 
The  result  has  been  that  we  leave  our  scholars  no  op- 
portunity for  the  perfection  of  their  work ;  and  the 
rest  of  us  try  to  persuade  ourselves  that  we  are 
scholars,  Avhen  in  point  of  fact  we  are  not. 

Now,  in  the  face  of  all  this,  I  venture  to  deliberately 
express  the  opinion  that  for  the  ordinary  Christian 


72  ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARIES 

minister  but  little  special  theological  training  is  need- 
ful. If  we  shall  be  able  to  recover  the  lost  fact  that 
the  ministry  is  intended  to  be  recruited  by  men  who 
enter  it  in  response  to  a  vocation,  and  not  from  hoys 
who  are  artificially  selected  and  especially  trained, 
the  reason  of  this  will  become  evident.  If  a  mature 
man  who  has  been  reared  in  a  Christian  community, 
within  a  Christian  Church,  in  a  Christian  family,  has 
obeyed  his  baptismal  admonition  to  hear  sermons  all 
his  life  long,  does  not  then  know  what  Christianity  is, 
we  may  fairly  assume  that  he  never  will  know.  The 
prerequisite  knowledge  for  the  ministry  is  of  quite  a 
different  kind.  The  gospel  is  not  abstruse  ;  it  is  per- 
fectly simple.  If  it  had  been  so  complex  and  difficult 
of  comprehension,  and  difficult  of  accurate  statement, 
as  is  often  now  assumed,  it  never  could  have  made  it- 
self intelligible  to  the  world.  What  is  needed  is 
a  knowledge  not  of  the  seed,  but  of  the  field.  As  a 
seed  of  course  it  shares  in  the  mystery  which  belongs 
to  all  seeds  and  to  all  vital  processes.  But  those  mys- 
teries are,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  as  insoluble  to  a 
trained  theologian  as  they  are  to  your  average  Chris- 
tian. But  it  is  absolutely  necessary  that  the  sower 
who  undertakes  to  plant  the  seed  should  be  in  posses- 
sion of  at  least  such  knowledge  of  the  actual  con- 
dition of  the  soil,  surroundings,  climate,  seasons,  and 
temperature  as  it  is  possible  for  him  to  obtain. 

Practically,  therefore,  the  line  of  procedure  would 
seem   to   be  to  shorten  the  time  which  is  expended 


ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARIES  Y3 

upon  technical  theological  training  and  greatly  extend 
the  period  of  study  in  secular  knowledge.  The  man 
who  enters  the  ministry  should  know  something,  at 
any  rate,  of  at  least  some  department  of  human  life, 
whether  it  be  business,  letters,  society,  commerce,  or 
what  not.  He  will  be  able  to  exercise  his  gifts  as  a 
minister  to  advantage  only  in  those  surroundings 
which  he  himself  understands.  But  this  kind  of 
knowledge  is  not  obtainable  in  a  theological  seminary. 
If  a  boy  settles  his  vocation  at  nineteen  and  passes 
through  a  Church  college  and  immediately  enters  the 
theological  seminary,  emerging  therefrom  at  twenty- 
three  or  twenty-four,  this  kind  of  knowledge  he  will  be 
compelled  to  attain  after  he  has  entered  the  ministry. 
He  will  attain  it  then,  if  ever,  under  the  greatest  pos- 
sible difficulties,  because  whole  fields  of  life  which 
under  other  conditions  would  be  open  to  him  for  ex- 
ploration he  Avill  find  closed. 

It  is  very  seriously  to  be  doubted  whether  the  now 
practically  universal  custom  of  preparing  all  our  can- 
didates for  the  ministry  in  seminaries  has  not  been, 
upon  the  whole,  a  serious  detriment  to  the  efficiency 
of  the  ministry,  I  am  inclined  to  think  that,  upon  the 
whole,  it  was  more  influential  before  there  were  any 
theological  seminaries.  It  must  be  remembered  that 
the  seminary  itself  is  quite  a  modern  invention.  In 
our  own  Church  in  America  it  only  reaches  back  to 
1825,  and  in  the  Church  of  England  no  further  than 
to  1860.     Previous  to  that  time,  and  outside  of  that 


T-1:  ABOUT   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARIES 

custom,  the  bishop  received  or  declined  to  receive  the 
men  who  came  to  him  as  a  postulant.  The  bishop's 
judgment  hinged  upon  the  man's  general  learning  and 
capacit}".  If  he  were  received  at  all,  he  was  ordained 
to  the  diaconate  almost  at  once.  During  his  diaconate 
he  learned  the  practical  work  of  the  ministry  under 
the  direction  of  some  mature  and  judicious  priest.  If 
he  became  a  specialist  in  an}^  department  of  theolog- 
ical learning,  he  took  up  that  specialty  later  on. 

My  own  opinion  is  that  our  own  ministry  would  be 
benefited  in  the  future  by  closing  the  doors  at  once  of 
fifteen  from  among  our  eighteen  seminaries.  If  the  en- 
dowment and  equipment  of  those  closed  could  be 
added  to  the  three  which  might  remain,  and  if  from  the 
teaching  corps  now  busy  in  them  all  could  be  culled  a 
sufficient  number  of  men  to  teach  those  in  the  re- 
maining three  far  beyond  that  which  they  are  now 
taught,  we  would  be  likely  to  have  within  our 
ministry  a  learning  which  we  do  not  now  possess. 
We  would  then  have  a  learned  ministry  to  do  those 
things  within  the  Church  which  it  is  the  scholar's 
function  to  do.  We  would  also  have  a  practical 
ministry  to  do  those  things  in  the  Church  for  which 
high  scholarship  is  not  an  equipment,  but  is  really  a 
hindrance.  We  would  thus  be  following  in  the  line 
of  apostolic  and  Catholic  custom,  and  we  would  have 
the  right  to  expect  that  efficiency  and  success  which 
God  vouchsafes  to  His  Church  while  the  Church  fol 
lows  along  the  lines  of  God's  methods. 


BKOAD  CHUECHMEN,  AND  :N^ARE0W 


TV 

BEOAD  CHUECHMEN,  AND  NAEEOW 

Me.  Balfour  in  his  late  very  remarkable  book 
has,  if  not  for  the  first  time,  at  any  rate  with  unprec- 
edented clearness,  pointed  out  the  double  function 
which  creeds  play  in  the  religious  economy.  In  the 
first  place  they  are  formulations  of  truth ;  and  in  the 
second  place  they  serve  as  the  platforms  around 
which  societies  are  organized.  To  be  more  specific  : 
the  propositions  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  the  XXXIX. 
Articles  and  the  Westminster  Confession  were  each 
and  all  drawn  up  originally  with  the  single  purpose  of 
expressing  accurately  and  sufficiently  the  contents  of 
the  Christian  Truth.  In  each  case  the  organization 
which  thus  expressed  its  mind  was  already  in  ex- 
istence and  strong  in  its  self-consciousness.  In  each 
case  the  organization  honestly  tried  to  state  the  trath 
as  it  saw  the  truth.  But  the  instant  such  a  formulary 
had  been  promulgated  and  had  been  accepted  by  the 
mind  of  the  church,  its  intrinsic  value  as  a  statement 
of  the  Truth  of  Christ  began  to  wane,  and  it  began  to 
be  thought  of  as  the  symbol,  the  badge,  the  banner, 
the  platform  of  a  society.  Before  formulation  its 
terms  were  things  to  be  sought  for  diligently  and 
humbly.     After  formulation  the  same  terms  became 

77 


78  BROAD   CHURCHMEN,   AND   NARROW 

things  to  be  fought  for  to  be  maintained  against  all 
comers,  to  suffer  martyrdom  for,  and  to  persecute  for. 
Year  by  year  and  generation  by  generation  there 
gathered  about  each  venerable  symbol  a  mass  of 
sentiment,  devotion,  reverence  and  sense  of  "  loyalty  " 
which  resents  any  suggestion  of  modification.  Thus 
the  symbols  which  were  originally  the  product  of  an 
open-minded  search  for  truth  have  come  to  be  the 
jealously  guarded  possession  of  a  conservatism  which 
takes  no  account  of  truth. 

Such  is  the  situation  to-day.  The  problem  is :  How 
to  procure  the  restatement  of  those  phases  of  the 
truth  of  Christ  which  it  has  been  discovered  that  the 
formularies  stated  wrongly,  and  to  do  this  in  the  face 
of  that  unreasoning  and  jealous  "  loyalty  "  to  the  for- 
mularies considered  as  banners  of  a  society.  The 
problem  takes  different  forms  in  different  churches, 
but  it  is  substantially  the  same  everywhere.  In  the 
church  of  Kome,  for  example,  there  is  really  but  one 
article  of  faith,  that  is  to  say,  the  principle  of  the 
authority  of  the  Church.  Tens  of  thousands  of  lib- 
eral Catholics  question  its  truth,  but  the  great  ma- 
jority maintain  it  because  of  their  devotion  to  the 
organization.  Among  the  Congregationalists  the 
controversy  has  raged  about  an  abstract  doctrine  or 
hypothesis  concerning  the  future  life.  One  class  of 
men,  following  moral  analogy  and  logical  necessity, 
have  announced  their  belief  in  a  probation  which  does 
not  close  when  life  ends,  but  is  continued  beyond  the 


BROAD   CHURCHMEN,   AND   NARROW  79 

grave.  Another  and  probably  larger  class  oppose 
this,  not  because  it  is  unreasonable,  but  because  it  is 
contrary  to  the  accepted  doctrine.  In  the  Presby- 
terian church  the  battle  rages.  One  class  asks  con- 
cerning certain  matters,  "  What  is  true  ?  "  Another 
and  far  larger  number  asks,  "  What  do  the  standards 
of  the  church  say?"  And  now  the  storm-centre 
seems  about  to  shift  itself  to  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
church.     What  form  will  it  there  assume  ? 

Before  proceeding  to  reply  to  that  question  it  may 
be  well  to  point  out  why  it  is  that  this  sort  of  diffi- 
culty has  arisen  all  around  just  now,  rather  than  fifty 
or  a  hundred  years  ago  ?  The  explanation  is  very  sim- 
ple. From  the  time  the  fathers  fell  asleep  all  things 
continued  as  they  were  until  about  the  middle  of  the 
present  century.  Since  that  time  more  and  greater 
changes  have  occurred  in  the  actual  conditions  of  hu- 
man life  than  in  the  two  thousand  years  which  pre- 
ceded. We  are  literally  living  in  a  'New  World.  It 
is  precisely  true  to  say  that  if  an  educated  man  who 
died  in  1850  were  to  revisit  the  earth  to-day  great 
areas  of  its  thought,  its  customs,  its  language,  would 
be  unintelligible  to  him.  He  would  find  whole 
libraries  in  the  physical  sciences  written  in  English, 
but  which  would  be  to  him  but  jargon.  In  philoso- 
phy he  would  discover  that  what  he  had  regarded  as 
postulates  have  been  dismissed  as  illegitimate  deduc- 
tions. So  the  necessity  has  arisen  to  examine  the 
formularies  of  religious  doctrine  in  the  light  of  the 


80  BKOAD    CHUECHMEN,   AXD   NARROW 

truth  which  shines  to-day.  The  proposal  to  do  so  is 
sternly  forbidden  for  fear  it  may  damage  the  organi- 
zations which  have  grouped  themselves  about  these 
formularies. 

In  the  Episcopal  church  the  men  who  ask  "  "What  is 
true  ?  "  have  been  denominated  "  Broad  Churchmen." 
Those  who  ask  "  What  is  proper  for  us  to  believe  ?  " 
have  been  classed  under  various  terms.  But  if  the 
two  classes  have  been  isolated  and  described  in  the 
Episcopal  church  aione  it  is  not  because  the  distinc- 
tion exists  there  alone.  It  underlies  aU  denominational 
distinctions.  The  truth  is  there  are  only  two  kinds  of 
churchmen  possible,  Broad  and  Xarrow.  These  two 
divisions  exhaust  the  subject.  Those  who  dislike  for 
any  reason  to  be  called  "  broad,"  and  prefer  to  label 
themselves  "  high  "  or  "  low,"  simply  hide  their  heads 
in  the  sand.  The  antithesis  of  Broad  is  Narrow,  and 
so  it  will  remain. 

Is  there  likely  to  be  a  lining  up  on  either  side  of  this 
distinction  ?  If  so,  just  what  form  is  the  contest 
likely  to  take  ?  and  what  is  likely  to  be  the  effect 
upon  the  Episcopal  church  ? 

A  thing  which  attracted  much  attention  in  this 
direction  was  the  promulgation  a  few  years  ago  by 
the  bishops  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  church  of  a 
letter  in  which  they  defined  the  doctrines  of  the  In- 
carnation and  of  Inspiration.  They  premised  that 
they  did  so  because  they  had  reason  to  believe  that 
these    doctrines    are   widely   questioned   within    the 


BROAD    CHURCHMEN,   AND    NARROW  81 

church.  They  did  not  enter  upon  any  attempt  to 
show  the  intrinsic  truth  of  the  two  doctrines,  but  only 
to  point  out  that  they  have  been  received,  and  that 
this  church  has  in  no  wise  ceased  to  demand  subscrip- 
tion thereto.  Of  course  this  deliverance  of  the  bishops 
had  no  ecclesiastical  authority,  not  having  been  put 
forth  by  the  House  of  Bishops  in  their  official  ca- 
pacity ;  nevertheless,  any  deliverance  of  the  bishops 
carries  with  it  great  weight  and  influence.  By  not  a 
few  it  was  deemed  an  end  to  controversy  upon  the 
subject-matter  with  which  it  deals.  But  it  is  well  to 
ask,  how  did  it  come  to  be  issued  ?  It  is  of  the  nature 
of  an  open  secret  that  it  was  set  forth  at  the  urgent 
instance  of  two  bishops  above  all  other  men.  The 
significant  thing  is  that  one  of  them,  the  Bishop  of 
Springfield,  would  probably  be  ranked  as  the 
"highest,"  and  the  other,  the  Bishop  of  Western 
Michigan,  as  the  "  lowest "  on  the  bench.  What  drew 
these  brethren  into  such  unity  upon  this  point  ?  The 
answer  is,  in  the  one  case  it  was  apprehension  about 
the  integrity  and  symmetry  of  the  ecclesiastical  or- 
ganization ;  in  the  other  case  it  was  apprehension 
about  the  integrity  and  symmetry  of  a  system  of 
theology.  It  has  chanced  that  the  shifting  of  time 
has  brought  two  "schools"  within  the  Episcopal 
church  to  occupy  temporarily  the  same  position  and 
enter  into  a  tacit  league,  offensive  and  defensive, 
against  a  third  "  school."  The  interest  of  the  first  is 
Church  qua  church  ;  of  the  second  is  Doctrine  qxia  doc- 


82  BROAD    CHURCHMEN,   AND   NARROW 

trine ;  of  the  third  is  Truth  qua  truth.  The  league  of 
the  first  two  is  ill-omenecl,  whether  one  thinks  of  the 
future  or  of  the  past.  As  to  the  future  magna  est 
Veritas^  et  prevalebit.  If  one  recalls  the  past  it  is  dif- 
ficult to  repress  a  smile  when  one  beholds  the  "  Cath- 
olics "  posing  as  the  champions  of  the  XXXIX. 
Articles,  and  the  "  Evangelicals  "  standing  up  for  the 
sanctity  of  the  Traditions  of  the  Elders  ! 

Nevertheless,  these  two  schools  have  joined  in  an  ap- 
peal to  the  Church  to  speak  authoritatively  upon  the 
question  of  the  nature  and  obligation  of  creed-subscrip- 
tion. They  have  elicited  a  reply  in  a  formula  which 
Avill  live  to  plague  both  them  and  the  Episcopate  for 
many  a  day :  "  Fixedness  of  interpretation  is  of  the 
essence  of  the  creeds,  whether  we  view  them  as  state- 
ments of  fact,  or  as  dogmatic  truths  founded  upon 
and  deduced  from  these  facts  and  once  for  all  deter- 
mined b}^  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  upon  the 
mind  of  the  church  "  !  It  Avould  be  difficult  to  frame 
a  more  blindly  obscurantist  phrase.  The  important 
question  for  the  American  Episcopal  church,  and  for 
the  public  in  so  far  as  it  is  concerned  with  the  church, 
is,  Does  the  temper  and  sentiment  of  the  phrase  above 
quoted  express  the  actual  attitude  of  the  clerg}?^  and 
people  of  the  church  ?  It  is  not  easy  to  answer  this 
question.  A  church  does  not  always  know  its  own 
mind,  any  more  than  an  individual  does.  Twent^'-tive 
years  ago,  Bishop  Colenso  was  deposed  for  teaching 
doctrines  which  are  to-day  accepted  by  every  bishop 


BROAD   CHURCHMEN,   AND    NARROW  83 

on  the  bench.  Dr.  Smith  and  Dr.  Briggs  were  de- 
posed for  teaching  doctrines  which  in  twenty  years 
more  will  be  accepted  without  question  by  the  General 
Assembly.  This  utterance  of  the  bishops  has  received 
the  unqualified  indorsement  of  the  denominational 
press  of  the  Episcopal  church.  It  is  also  accepted  by 
very  many  without  thought  simply  because  it  is  sup- 
posed to  be  the  formal  deliverance  of  the  House  of 
Bishops.  If  its  opposite  had  been  set  forth,  these  per- 
sons would  have  accepted  that  with  equal  loyalty.  It 
is  also  accepted  enthusiastically  by  the  "  Catholic " 
party  because  it  appears  to  indorse  their  characteristic 
contention  as  to  the  "  authority "  of  the  church. 
This  party,  which  twent}^  years  ago  fought  a  brave 
battle  for  toleration  and  standing  ground  within  the 
church,  which  they  then  claimed  to  be  catholic  enough 
to  embrace  all  who  could  say  the  Apostolic  Creeds, 
have  dreamed  lately  of  taking  possession  of  the  house, 
and  making  it  too  strait  for  the  class  who  were  the 
champions  of  their  own  liberty  at  a  time  when  they 
were  not  able  to  maintain  it  themselves. 

One  might  raise  at  this  point  a  question  of  honor 
and  gratitude,  but  it  will  probably  be  more  to  the  pur- 
pose to  pass  to  the  question,  Is  the  Catholic  party 
likely  to  succeed  ?  On  general  principles  one  would 
say  not.  The  Episcopal  church  has  had  rather  a  long 
history.  More  than  once  the  attempt  has  been  made 
to  narrow  it  so  as  to  exclude  or  eject  a  "  school."  The 
attempt  has  never  succeeded.     Not  onl}'^  has  it  never 


84:  BROAD   CHURCHMEN,   AND   NAEROW 

succeeded,  but  in  every  case  where  it  has  been  tried 
the  outcome  has  been  to  bring  forward  and  give  dom- 
inance to  the  school  which  it  had  been  proposed  to 
crush.  In  the  case  before  us  there  are  several  evident 
reasons  why  the  attempt  is  foredoomed  to  failure,  and 
this  in  spite  of  any  temporary  advantage  which  it  may 
gain.  First  of  all  there  is  the  glaring  incongruity  be- 
tween the  theoretic  catholicity  and  the  practical  de- 
nominationalism  of  a  party  which  adopts  this  policy. 
The  people  may  be  let  alone  to  discern  this  inconsist- 
ency and  to  deal  with  it.  In  the  second  place,  there 
is  a  reason  to  which  one  refers  with  hesitation.  Pos- 
sibly it  may  be  enough  to  say  that  with  half  a  dozen 
exceptions  neither  the  men  of  learning,  of  influence,  of 
reputation  nor  of  ability  are  to  be  found  in  the  so- 
called  "  Catholic  "  party.  It  possesses  a  strong  esprit 
du  corps  and  adroit  managers,  but  not  many  scholars, 
preachers  or  men  who  in  any  way  touch  the  public. 
There  are  some  of  the  first  rank  'who  were  at  one  time 
counted  within  it,  but  who  have  either  outgrown  it, 
or  have  been  "  read  out  "  of  it.  A  party  which  sys- 
tematically ejects  its  strongest  men  would  not  seem 
to  have  much  hold  upon  the  future.  But  the  third  and 
chief  reason  is  that  it  is  part  of  a  movement  which  has 
passed  its  period  of  highest  strength.  That  revival  of 
the  principle  of  ecclesiastical  authority,  which  set  in, 
in  the  early  years  of  this  century,  has  moved  from 
east  to  west  in  much  the  same  manner  as  a  freshet 
moves  from  north  to  south  down  the  Mississippi.     This 


BROAD   CHUECHMEN,   AND   NAREOW  85 

last  phenomenon  begins  by  the  myriad  little  streams 
pouring  their  swollen  currents  into  the  head  waters  of 
the  great  river.  When  it  is  high  water  at  St.  Paul  the 
river  has  not  yet  risen  at  St.  Louis.  By  the  time  when 
it  is  high  water  at  St.  Louis  the  freshet  has  passed  St. 
Paul,  and  the  streams  have  ceased  to  feed  it.  In  the 
stream  of  ecclesiasticism,  it  was  high  water  at  Oxford 
forty  years  ago.  Twenty  years  ago,  the  flood  was  at 
its  height  at  Kew  York  and  Philadelphia.  To-day,  the 
height  of  the  freshet  is  at  the  longitude  of  Milwaukee 
and  Springfield.  It  is  no  longer  being  fed  from  the 
original  streams.  Even  its  stored-up  waters  have  been 
sluiced  off  by  Dr.  Gore  and  his  collaborators  into  other 
channels. 

Judging  from  the  despondent  tones  of  the  leaders 
of  the  Catholic  party,  it  would  appear  that  they  do 
not  look  to  the  future  with  much  hope.  Says  Dr. 
Dix :  "  The  recent  startling  appearance  of  pantheistic 
teachers  in  our  church  in  the  person  of  liberal  theolo- 
gians, so  called,  the  open  denial  of  several  of  the  facts 
stated  in  the  creed,  the  contemptuous  repudiation  of 
the  authority  of  our  church,  the  substitution  of  ideas 
derived  from  the  philosophy  of  evolution  for  the  doc- 
trine of  the  gospel  as  this  church  has  received  the 
same,  and  the  avowed  determination  to  throw  the  or- 
dination vow  to  the  winds,  and  freely  to  proclaim 
whatever  views  the  individual  minister  may  evolve 
from  year  to  year  and  from  day  to  day,  out  of  his  own 
consciousness, — these  signs  of  the  hour  increase.     It 


86  BROAD   CHURCHMEN,   AND   NARROW 

looks  as  if  society  was  preparing  to  rise  up  in  general 
revolt  against  the  gospel  as  we  have  learned  it  from 
the  Apostles  of  Jesus  Christ  and  the  church  which  He 
has  made  the  witness  and  keeper  of  His  revelation.  If 
it  does,  so  much  the  worse  for  society."  Stripped  of 
rhetoric,  this  plaint  means  that  there  are  men  in  the 
Episcopal  church  who  categorically  deny  that  "  fixed- 
ness of  interpretation  is  of  the  essence  of  the  creeds  ; " 
and  that  there  are  so  many  of  them  that  another  class 
has  become  alarmed,  not  to  say  despondent.  So  there 
are.  What,  then,  is  the  attitude  of  "  Broad  "  Church- 
men toward  formulated  doctrine  ?  And  what  do  they 
propose  to  do  ?  In  the  first  place,  they  subscribe  con 
a/more  to  the  Catholic  creeds.  They  recite  them  in 
public.  They  teach  them  in  private.  But  having 
done  so,  they  conceive  that  they  have  discharged  their 
obligation.  They  proceed  to  interpret  the  articles  of 
the  creeds  in  the  light  of  to-day.  They  do  not  believe 
that  the  Holy  Spirit  has  been  absent  or  inert  since  the 
date  of  the  Council  of  Nice  or  Constantinople.  They 
believe  that  Copernicus  and  ISTewton  and  Darwin  have 
thrown  light  upon  the  complex  equations  of  God  and 
man  as  really  as  have  Athanasius  or  Thomas  Aquinas 
or  St.  Bernard.  They  hold  it  to  be  disloyalty  to  God 
to  shut  their  eyes  to  the  light  which  comes  from  any 
quarter.  If  accepting  it  thankfully  means  disloyalty 
to  the  Church,  then  so  much  the  worse  for  the  Church. 
They  think  they  are  most  loyal  to  the  Church  when 
they  are  most  loyal  to  its  Master.     When  they  are 


BEOAD    CHURCHMEN,    AND   NARROW  87 

pressed  to  say  whether  or  not  they  believe  that  the 
Faith  could  endure  in  case  it  should  appear  that  any 
particular  article  of  the  creed  should  be  shown  to  be 
contrary  to  fact,  they  reply  that  that  is  an  academic 
question  which  they  do  not  care  to  discuss.  If  they 
are  pressed  to  say  whether  or  not  they  believe  in  some 
secondary  article  of  doctrine,  such,  for  example,  as 
"  Inspiration  of  Scripture,"  the  propitiatory  doctrine  of 
the  Atonement,  or  the  doctrine  of  Apostolic  Succes- 
sion, they  reply  that  they  do  not  think  it  worth  while 
to  answer  categorically  until  they  first  know  more  pre- 
cisely what  their  interrogator  means  by  the  terms  he 
uses.  But  they  will  resist  with  all  their  might  any 
proposition  to  make  the  church  more  exclusive  and 
select  by  the  adoption  of  more  refined  and  minute 
statements  of  doctrine.  They  sincerely  believe  that 
they  are  the  friends  and  not  the  enemies  of  the  church. 
Their  apprehension  for  her  is  not  that  she  may  become 
too  loose  in  her  teaching,  but  that  she  may  be  beguiled 
or  bullied  into  taking  the  dogmatic  attitude  of  a 
sect. 

One  thing,  however,  Broad  Churchmen  will  not  do, 
they  will  not  become  an  organized  party.  They  will 
make  no  attempt  to  secure  control  of  the  "machine." 
They  will  do  their  duty  as  it  is  given  them  to  see  it, 
each  in  his  own  lot.  If  the  machinery  of  the  church 
should  ever  pass  into  hands  hostile  to  them,  they  will 
regret  it  for  their  own  sakes,  but  they  will  regret  it 
a  thousand  times  more  for  the  sake  of  the  church.     As 


88  BROAD   CHURCHMEN,   AND   NARROW 

to  this  contingency  they  are  not  alarmed.  They  do 
not  think  that  the  church  is  in  peril  of  committing 
suicide.  Suicide  it  would  be,  they  are  persuaded,  for 
the  church  to  permit  herself  to  become  the  narrow, 
petty,  unlovely,  and  impotent  thing  which  ecclesiastics 
and  dogmatists  would  make  of  her. 


THE  NEXT  STEP  IN  CHEISTIANITY 


THE   NEXT   STEP   IN   CHEISTIANITY 

Veey  different  notions  are  entertained  by  thought- 
ful men  about  the  nature  and  person  of  Jesus  Christ.  It 
is  generally  agreed,  however,  that  no  one  will  appear 
whose  authority  could  be  more  trustworthy  in  the 
sphere  of  Religion.  What  He  did  not  know,  in  that 
department,  is  generally  conceded  to  be  either  not 
worth  the  knowing,  or  not  possible  to  be  known.  It 
is  generally  conceded,  also,  that  He  Himself,  and  His 
deliverances,  have  never  been  more  than  partially 
comprehended.  He  declared  more  than  once  that 
His  nearest  and  most  sympathetic  friends  did  not  un- 
derstand Him.  It  is  clear  that  they  did  not ;  and 
that,  in  some  particulars,  they  strangely  misconceived 
Him.  But,  all  the  same,  they  were  deeply  impressed 
by  Him.  The  same  has  been  true  of  "Christendom" 
for  now  these  nearly  twenty  centuries.  He  has  been 
the  most  considerable  influence  which  has  shaped  and 
colored  the  movement  of  humanity.  He  continues  to 
be  so,  as  is  evident  to  any  one  who  simply  looks 
about  him.  His  name  is  in  point  of  fact  "exalted 
above  every  name." 

Judging  simply  from  the  facts  which  are  equally 
accessible   to  every  one,  it  seems  pretty  plain,  first^ 

91 


92  THE   NEXT   STEP   IN   CHRISTIANITY 

that  men  will  not  get  on  without  a  Religion ;  and 
second,  that  there  is  no  other  Religion  available  ex- 
cept Christianity. 

A  few  people,  it  is  true,  are  experimenting  with 
Swedenborgianism,  and  Compteism,  and  Buddhism, 
and  "  Christian  Science,"  but  these  may  be  dismissed 
as  une  quantite  negligahle. 

From  all  that  one  can  see,  Christianity,  in  some 
form,  is  likely  to  remain  the  Religion  of  the  enlight- 
ened world. 

Christianity  in  some  form  /  but  in  what  form  ? 

Viewed  from  the  outside,  no  institution  has  under- 
gone such  startling  transformations  as  has  Christianity. 
One  who  looked  at  it  casually  in  the  first  century,  say 
at  Antioch,  and  again  in  the  fourth,  at  Constantinople, 
in  the  fourteenth  in  Rome,  and  in  the  nineteenth  in 
New  York,  would  find  great  difficulty  in  identifying 
it.  Will  any  of  these  forms  be  abiding?  Or,  will 
the  Christianity  of  the  future  take  on  an  aspect  as 
markedly  different  from  any  of  these  as  they  are  from 
each  other  ? 

I  venture  to  think  that  this  last  is  true  ;  and  that  it 
is  a  truth  the  importance  of  which  can  hardly  be  es- 
timated. 

The  great  metamorphoses  which  Christianity  has 
experienced  have  not  been  very  many,  but  they  have 
been  very  marked,  and  they  have  each  and  all  been 
characterized  by  two  features :  they  have  been  com- 
paratively sudden,  and  they  have  not  been  recognized 


THE   NEXT   STEP   IN   CHRISTIANITY  93 

by  the  people  who  were  living  when  they  occurred. 
The  phases  through  which  Christianity  has  passed 
have  been  substantially  these  three :  viz,  the  Dog- 
matic^ the  Ecclesiastical^  and  the  Mystical  (or  "  Evan- 
gelical ").  What  will  the  next  one  be  ?  I  venture  to 
think  that  it  is  very  near,  if  not  already  here,  though 
unrecognized.  This  paper  is  an  attempt  to  identify 
it  in  the  midst  of  many  phenomena  which,  without 
the  clue,  seem  meaningless  and  hopeless.  The  im- 
portance of  doing  this,  if  it  can  be  done,  is  obvious. 
But,  to  do  so,  it  will  be  necessary  briefly,  to  review  the 
past. 

It  was  both  inevitable  and  right  that  Christianity 
should  at  first  put  on  a  dogmatic  dress.  The  little 
group  of  men  who  had  been  profoundly  impressed  by 
the  person  and  words  of  their  Judean  Master,  pro- 
posed to  themselves  to  be  missionaries.  But  this  fact 
made  it  necessary  that  they  should  cast,  in  some  port- 
able and  transmissible  form,  their  beliefs  about  the 
person  and  doctrine  of  their  Principal.  This  was  not 
easily  nor  readily  done.  It  is  clear,  from  the  record, 
that  their  Master  was  one  of  the  most  perplexing 
characters  imaginable.  Beside  that,  the  impression 
which  He  left  upon  them  was  the  result  of  years  of 
companionship.  For  them  to  state  clearly  just  what 
the  impression  was,  was  not  easy.  It  did  not  get  it- 
self done  completely  for  several  centuries.  Much  con- 
ferring with  one  another,  and  much  interchange  of 
opinion  by  converts  drawn  from  difi'erent  provinces 


94  THE   NEXT   STEP   IN   CHRISTIANITY 

were  necessary  to  formulate  a  working  creed.  It  was 
an  absolutely  necessary  thing  to  do  ;  but  it  was  also 
natural  that,  when  the  Christian  Community  had 
been  engrossed  for  three  or  four  centuries  in  formu- 
lating  their  belief,  they  should  come  into  the  habit  of 
thinking  that  accurate  belief,  and  an  accepted  way  of 
stating  that  belief,  were  the  most  important  of  all  pos- 
sible things,  Christianity  came,  in  their  minds,  to  be 
identified  with  Doctrine.  A  large  section  of  Chris- 
tendom stopped  at  that  point,  and  has  ever  since  re- 
fused to  move.  The  Eastern  Church  rests  in  Ortho- 
doxy. She  takes  that  word  for  her  official  title. 
And  so  she  sits  a  spectacle  in  her  Basilica.  Old  she 
is,  but  not  venerable.  Her  hair  is  hoary,  but  the  fire 
of  youth  is  gone  from  her  leaden  eyes.  AVrapt  in  her 
embroidered  vestments,  she  slumbers  on,  as  powerless 
to  touch  or  be  touched  by  the  life  of  the  men  and 
women  of  Russia  and  Greece,  as  the  mummy  of  Seti 
is  that  of  the  Fellahin  of  Egypt. 

But  the  Western  Church,  with  its  creed  in  its  hand, 
passed  on  into  the  next  phase.  It  became  a  great 
Organization.  It  inherited  the  constructive  spirit  of 
the  Great  Empire,  and  bettered  its  instruction.  It 
identified  Christianity  with  a  Church.  For  tlie  first 
four  centuries,  all  revolved  about  Doctrine.  For  the 
next  ten,  all  revolved  about  Organization.  Slowly 
and  powerfully  the  structure  was  builded.  Ko  insti- 
tution, probably,  has  ever  been  formed  of  as  intract- 
able material,  under  as  unfavorable  circumstances,  or 


THE    NEXT   STEP    IN    CHRISTIANITY  95 

has  commanded  the  unqualified  services  of  so  many 
generations  of  astute  and  earnest  men.  Within  its 
walls,  and  guarded  by  its  ever  watchful  sentinels,  the 
theological  system  builders  continued  to  elaborate 
their  endless  schemes  of  dogma.  They  overlaid  the 
Missionary  Creeds,  and  buried  them  out  of  sight  under 
a  grotesque  mass  of  derivative  doctrines.  But  it  was 
the  Churchmen,  and  not  the  Theologians,  who  guided 
the  movement  of  Christianity  during  this  period. 
But,  long  before  the  period  ended,  their  task  had  also 
been  completed.  The  simple  missionary  Organization, 
which  had  been  necessary  to  carry  the  simple  Mission- 
ary Creed,  was  overlaid  and  buried  out  of  sight  in  the 
mighty  structure  of  the  Eoman  Church. 

Then  came  the  third  phase,  known  popularly  as  the 
Reformation.  The  phrase  is  misleading.  It  was  not 
a  reformation,  but  a  new  step.  It  was  the  successful 
issue  of  a  long  series  of  efforts,  made  by  the  most 
earnest,  sagacious,  virile  and  devout  men  in  the  West- 
ern Church,  to  carry  their  religion  from  the  region  of 
dogma  and  organization  into  the  realm  of  personal 
experience.  Jerome  of  Prague,  Arnold  of  Brescia, 
Wyckliff,  Huss,  Luther,  Calvin,  Colet,  More,  Cranmer, 
George  Fox,  Tauler,  William  Law,  John  Wesley,  all 
sought  the  same  end.  In  the  modern  cant  they  would 
all  be  called  "  Evangelicals."  The  secret  spirit  which 
they  all  held  in  common  was  the  belief  that  Christian- 
ity is  essentially  the  establishment  by  the  individual 
of  a  conscious,  personal  relation  with  God.     This  idea 


96  THE   NEXT   STEP   IN   CHEISTIANITY 

of  "  conversion  "  is  the  diiferentiate  of  Protestantism. 
In  American  Christianity  it  has  held,  until  lately,  the 
central  place. 

Wow,  it  will  be  observed  that  each  of  these  phases 
is  an  advance  upon  the  one  which  preceded  it.  No 
one  of  them  was  possible  until  the  one  which  went  be- 
fore had  been  measurably  accomplished.  Each  one 
was  entered  upon  unconsciously.  Each  was  strenu- 
ously opposed  at  its  beginning  by  the  mass  who 
fancied  their  own  stage  to  be  final.  Each,  when  it  be- 
came an  accomplished  fact,  reacted  upon  and  modified 
what  had  gone  before. 

At  present  there  are  unmistakable  signs  on  every 
hand  that  a  farther  step  is  about  to  be  taken.  What 
will  it  be  ?  That  it  will  still  be  Christianity  no  candid 
man  can  doubt.  But  it  is  equally  plain  that  it  will 
be  as  unlike  any  phase  of  it  heretofore  seen  as  these 
have  been  and,  in  their  survivals,  are  unlike  each 
other. 

It  is  clear,  in  the  first  place,  that  Christianity  has 
already  broken  out  of  the  bounds  which  have  long 
contained  it.  It  has  broken  out  of  the  old  bounds  of 
Doctrine ;  out  of  the  Church  ;  and  will  no  longer  sub- 
mit to  conventional  "  Experiences."  There  is  not  a 
single  "  Confession  of  Faith  "  which  serves  to  express 
the  actual  belief  of  even  the  most  conservative  mem- 
bers of  the  ministry  of  any  church  which  is  supposed 
to  accept  such  a  Confession.  They  are  all  in  the  same 
boat.     The    Decrees    of    the    Council    of    Trent,  the 


THE   NEXT    STEP   IN    CHRISTIANITY  97 

XXXIX.  Articles,  the  Westminster  Confession,  that 
of  Augsburg  or  Dort,  while  they  all  retain  a  place  of 
quasi  authority  in  the  several  churches,  have  become 
powerless  to  hold  the  real  belief  of  even  the  clergy. 
That  this  convicts  the  clergy  of  insincerity  will  only 
be  alleged,  by  the  shallow  and  the  ignorant.  A  pro- 
found change  has  come  about  against  which  they  are 
helpless.  They  are  honestly  trying  to  readjust  the 
conditions  with  earnestness  and  singleness  of  heart. 
Some  think  to  find  relief  by  formally  abolishing 
doctrinal  formulas  which  have  ceased  to  be  credible. 
Some  think  to  find  it  by  "  revising  "  so  as  to  accommo- 
date the  doctrinal  statements  to  the  actual  beliefs  cur- 
rent. Both  methods  will  fail,  though  it  is  not  in  my 
way,  in  this  paper,  to  say  why.  I  am  only  concerned 
to  point  out  the  fact  that  religious  belief  has  broken 
out  of  the  formulas  which  once  contained  it. 

In  the  second  place,  functions  which  once  belonged 
to  organized  Christianity  have,  one  by  one,  been  taken 
in  hand  by  others.  Notable  among  these  are  Educa- 
tion and  the  Administration  of  Charity.  Only  one 
branch  of  the  church  now  makes  any  serious  claim  of 
right  to  control  the  machinery  of  education.  And,  in 
the  United  States  at  any  rate,  a  constantly  increasing 
number  of  her  adherents  either  make  this  claim  half- 
heartedly under  the  pressure  of  their  priesthood,  or  re- 
fuse to  make  it  altogether.  In  the  distribution  of  their 
alms  rich  men  do  not  now,  as  once,  make  the  Church 
their  almoner.     Wise  men  bring  gold,  frankincense 


98  THE   NEXT   STEP   IN   CHEISTIANITY 

and  myrrh  to  the  King,  but  they  appoint  their  own 
agents  for  its  distribution.  To  speak  of  those  near  at 
hand  and  notable,  I  name  the  Girard  College,  the 
Mills  Hotel,  the  Williamson  School,  the  Drexel  Insti- 
tute, and  the  secular  societies  for  the  organization  of 
charity. 

In  the  third  place,  good  men  are,  in  an  increasing 
number  of  cases,  unmoved  by  the  conventional  "  ex- 
periences "  of  religion.  A  century  ago  "  The  Great 
Awakening"  swept  over  America  like  a  spiritual 
cyclone.  So  sturdy  a  man  as  Benjamin  Franklin 
could  not  keep  his  feet  against  it.  The  masses  were 
swept  by  it  into  a  religious  frenzy.  Fitful  gusts, 
more  local  and  less  intense,  have  been  present  ever 
since.  But  men  are  less  impressible  by  them.  Twenty 
years  ago  Mr.  Moody,  the  Evangelist,  could  produce 
"  conversions  "  almost  at  will.  Mr.  Moody  before  he 
died  became  the  Educator. 

What  do  these  changes  mean  ? 

What  is  to  be  done  ? 

To  these  questions  some  can  give  a  short  and  easy 
answer.  "  It  means,"  say  they,  "  that  Ave  arc  in  a  day 
of  apostasy.  It  is  all  due  to  the  hardness  of  men's 
hearts.  We  live  in  the  midst  of  a  stiff-necked  and  re- 
bellious generation."  But  when  these  are  called  upon 
to  say  what  should  be  done,  they  give  diiferent 
answers. 

The  Theologian  says,  "  let  us  restore  to  its  old  com- 
pleteness  our   Confession,  bating   of   it   no  word  or 


THE   NEXT   STEP   IN    CHRISTIANITY  99 

phrase ;  and,  if  we  must  perish,  let  us  fall  like  our 
fathers — with  the  old  blue  banner  in  our  hands." 

The  EcclesiastiG  says,  "  let  us  restore  the  Church 
of  that  period  when  it  had  the  power  to  guide  the 
steps  and  control  the  conduct  of  all  men." 

The  Evangelical  says,  "  let  us  pray." 

They  all  misread  the  situation.  It  has  always  been 
true,  of  course,  that  a  large  portion  of  the  community 
have  been  indifferent  or  hostile  to  Christianity.  They 
are  "irreligious"  men.  They  are,  therefore,  usually 
thought  of  as  immoral  men ;  for  religion  and  morality 
are,  in  the  common  mind,  so  intimately  associated  that 
they  are  thought  of  as  present  or  absent  together.  If 
this  were  the  only  class  to  be  considered  the  case 
would  be  very  simple.  But  a  large,  and  increasingly 
larger,  proportion  of  good  men  cannot  any  longer  be 
called  Christian,  -^to  be  a  Christian  means  any  one  or  all 
of  those  things,  which  it  has,  thus  far,  been  officially  de- 
fined to  mean.  They  are  good  men  and  women,  tried 
by  any  test  which  may  fairly  be  applied  to  goodness. 
They  are  sober,  kindly,  earnest,  sympathetic,  clean, 
charitable.  But  they  are  "  unsound  "  in  doctrine  ;  they 
are  not  "  church-members " ;  they  are  not  aware  of 
having  undergone  any  subjective  "  experience."  This 
class  is  increasing  at  a  rate  which  few  realize. 

Says  that  Presbyterian,  the  late  Dr.  Bruce,  Professor 
of  New  Testament  Exegesis,  in  the  Free  Church  of  Glas- 
gow :  "  I  am  disposed  to  think  that  a  great  and  steadily 
increasing  portion  of  the  moral  worth  of  society  lies 


loo  THE   NEXT   STEP   IN    CHRISTIANITY 

outside  the  Church,  separated  from  it,  not  by  godless- 
ness,  but  rather  by  exceptionally  intense  moral 
earnestness." 

The  leadership  of  science  and  art  is  already  almost 
entirely  in  the  hands  of  men  who  have  broken  with 
organized  Christianity.  They  are  the  guides  and 
pioneers  in  political  and  social  reforms.  They  are  a 
large  minority — promising  soon  to  be  a  majorit}^ — in 
the  management  of  charitable  and  reformatory  insti- 
tutions. The}^  are  the  professors  in  colleges  and  the 
teachers  in  normal  schools.  They  are  kind  husbands, 
faithful  wives,  good  sons,  daughters,  friends.  What 
is  their  relation  to  Christianity  ?  The  answer  is,  they 
are  Christians  in  fact  ',  hut  they  are  tcaiting  for  Chris- 
tianity to  2><^iss  'into  a  neio  j)hase  which  will  include 
them  inform. 

Like  every  household,  the  Church  is  confronted  at 
times  with  the  necessity  of  house  cleaning  and  rear- 
rangement of  furniture.  During  the  disturbance  of  this 
process  a  considerable  number  of  the  family  and  rela- 
tives prefer  to  live  out  of  doors.  They  will  not  do  so 
permanently.  They  do  not  wish  to  do  so.  One  may 
venture  to  say,  also,  that  they  would  play  a  more 
honorable  part  if  they  remained  in  the  house  and  lent 
a  hand,  and  gave  their  opinions  concerning  the  proper 
rearrangements,  rather  than  to  stand  critically  outside, 
waiting  till  the  task  be  done.  But  things  are  as  they 
are.  And  they  can  truthfully  retort  that  their  sugges- 
tions of  change  in  doctrine  or  discipline  were  not  well 


THE   NEXT    STEP    IN    CHRISTIANITY  lOl 

received  when  they  did  remain  within.  But  Avill  the 
Christian  society  of  the  future  be  such  as  will  be  able 
to  embrace  them  ?     I  think  it  will,  and  for  this  reason  : 

The  formal  statement  of  Christian  doctrine,  and  the 
organization  of  the  Christian  church,  are  always  de- 
termined by  the  actual  beliefs  and  practices  which 
precede  the  formal  action.  Laws  in  the  religious 
sphere  are  analogous  to  laws  in  the  political  sphere  ; 
they  are  but  the  expression  of  antecedent  habits. 
What,  then,  are  the  present  habits  of  the  religious 
world  which  will,  by  and  by,  find  formal  expression  ? 
Their  general  drift  may  be  seen  in  two  or  three  strik- 
ing phenomena. 

1.  The  altogether  unprecedented  interest  now 
manifest  in  the  person  and  teaching  of  Jesus  Christ. 
Booksellers  tell  me  that  there  are  only  one  or  two 
books  in  the  English  tongue  of  which  so  many  copies 
are  sold  as  of  Ben  Hur.  Those  who  have  read  it 
know  that  this  is  not  on  account  of  its  literary  excel- 
lence, great  as  that  is,  but  because  of  the  way  in 
which  it  introduces  Jesus.  Dr.  Farrar's  Life  of 
Christ  is  one  of  the  few  books  of  which  it  pays  to 
produce  cheap  and  popular  editions.  JS'ow,  hardly 
any  Life  of  Christ  can  be  found  which  dates  back 
more  than  fifty  years.  They  are  all  the  product  of 
the  nineteenth  century.  They  have  all  been  written 
in  response  to  the  increasing  desire  of  the  community 
to  know  just  who  and  what  Jesus  was,  and  just  what 
He  did  and  said. 


102  THE   XEXT   STEP   IX   CHEISTIANITY 

2.  The  enormous  popularity  of  what  one  may  call 
the  "  Drummond  Literature."  The  late  Scotch  Pro- 
fessor's "  IS'atural  Law  in  the  Spiritual  "World," 
and  "The  Greatest  Thing  in  the  AYorld,"  and  such 
like,  have  been  hailed  by  millions  as  the  statement 
they  earnestly  desired.  "With  all  their  shallowness, 
and  forced  analogies,  they  do  answer  the  present  de- 
sire to  express  Christianity  in  terms  of  actual  life. 

3.  The  strenuous  attempt  to  apply  the  teaching  of 
Jesus  to  the  problems  of  conduct.  John  Fiske, 
Tolstoi,  Henry  George,  Powderly,  Leo  X.,  and  Mr. 
Bellamy,  have  all  formally  essayed  to  point  out  how 
this  can,  or  ought  to  be,  done.  Mr.  Fiske,  in  his 
"  Destiny  of  Man,"  says,  in  effect,  that  this  is  already 
within  the  possibility  of  practical  life.  Mr.  George 
always  describes  himself  as,  above  all  things  else,  a 
Christian.  "  Christian  Socialism "  has  become  a 
phrase  to  conjure  by.  The  Christian  Churches  all 
acknowledge,  in  a  way,  their  obligation  to  ease  the 
burden  of  human  living.  A  conservative  Churchman 
of  fifty  years  ago,  who  went  regularly  on  Sunday  to 
hear  a  doctrinal  thesis  in  a  Church  which  was  shut  up 
and  deserted  all  the  rest  of  the  week,  would  be  dumb- 
founded if  he  could  re-visit  the  old  holy  place  and  find 
built  on  to  it  a  dispensary,  a  kitchen,  a  social  hall,  a 
lyceum,  and,  mayhap,  a  stage. 

The  change  which  has  come  about  in  the  actual 
thought  about  religion,  may  be  strikingly  seen  in  the 
fact,  that  the  motive  of  the  Order  of  the  Knights  of 


THE   NEXT   STEP   IN   CHRISTIANITY  103 

Malta,  which  existed  for  the  "  defence  of  the  Faith," 
and  of  the  Jesuits  which  existed  for  the  "  defence  of 
the  Church,"  have  become  unintelligible  or  offensive  ; 
whereas,  a  Catholic  Total  Abstinence  Society  or  a 
Young  Man's  Christian  Association  seem  natural  and 
fitting. 

The  machinery  for  "  Kevivals,"  also,  which  even  a 
generation  ago  could  be  set  up  and  worked  with 
ndievete^  is  now  clearly  in  its  decadence. 

Facts,  all  pointing  in  the  same  direction,  might  be 
multiplied  indefinitely.  But  to  what  do  they  point  ? 
To  this :  Christianity  has  passed  through  the  phases 
of  Dogmatism,  Ecclesiasticism  and  Experimentalism, 
and  is  now  seeking  to  express  itself  in  the  region  of 
conduct. 

"  But,"  it  will  be  protested,  "  Christianity  always 
has  affected  men's  conduct,  this  has  been  its  glory, 
that  it  has  made  men  good." 

This  claim  is  true,  but  it  is  not  true  in  the  sense  in 
which  it  is  made.  The  present  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury feels  called  upon  to  warn  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land that  it  has  never  "received  a  shadow  of  com- 
mission to  set  forth  as  Doctrine  and  Worship  that  re- 
ligion which  began  as  Morals  and  Social  order."  It  is 
true  that  Christianity  was  at  first  set  forth  as  a  "life." 
The  "  Faith  "  which  it  demanded  was  not  an  intel- 
lectual but  a  moral  possession.  But  when  Theology 
began  to  dominate,  the  quality  of  the  "  life  "  deterio- 
rated.    So  far  as  temper  and  character  are  concerned 


104  THE   NEXT   STEP   IN   CHRISTIANITY 

there  could  hardly  be  a  more  violent  contrast  than 
that  between  the  men  who  formed  the  first  Council  at 
Jerusalem  and  those  who  discussed  the  refinements 
of  Theology  in  the  fifth  century  or  the  sixteenth. 
Where  the  theological  spirit  has  been  in  control,  it 
has  sharply  drawn  a  dividing  line  across  the  area  of 
thought,  calling  one  portion  "  sacred "  and  another 
"  profane," 

"Where  Ecclesiasticism  has  controlled,  it  has  por- 
tioned out  conduct  into  "  religious  "  and  "  secular  "  ;  so 
that  the  Sicilian  bandit,  who  pays  punctiliously  his 
duties  to  the  Church,  is  not  conscious  of  any  incon- 
gruity as  he  crosses  himself  and  mutters  an  Ave  while 
he  goes  forth  to  rob. 

Where  Evangelicalism  has  prevailed  it  has  drawn 
the  sharpest  possible  distinction  between  "  religion " 
and  "  morality,"  making  everything  of  the  one,  and 
speaking  contemptuously  of  the  other.  Luther  did 
not  hesitate  to  say  that  "  a  Christian  cannot  if  he  will 
lose  his  salvation  by  any  multitude  or  magnitude  of 
sins  unless  he  ceases  to  believe ;  for  no  sin  can  damn 
him  but  unbelief  alone." 

So  that  whUe  it  is  true  in  the  main  that  Christianity 
has  always  had  its  effect  to  improve  the  quality  of 
men's  lives,  it  is  also  true  that  it  has  not  always  set 
this  before  itself  as  its  main  purpose.  It  has  been 
thought  of  as  a  device  to  secure  "  salvation."  Now, 
the  interest  for  "  salvation  "  is  surely  receding  behind 
the  interest  for  "  conduct."     The  appeal  is  about  to  be 


THE   NEXT   STEP   IN    CHKISTIANITY  105 

taken  to  life.     Christianity  will  more  and  more  con- 
cern itself  with  living. 

But  in  doing  so  it  will  not  revise  nor  formally 
abolish  its  previous  methods.  What  is  superfluous  in 
them  will  be  allowed  to  be  quietly  forgotten.  It  can- 
not subsist  without  a  Creed,  an  Organization  and  an 
Act  of  Choice  by  the  individual.  It  gained  each  one 
of  these  essentials,  as  we  believe,  under  the  guidance 
of  that  Spirit  of  wisdom  with  which  its  Founder  im- 
bued it.  The  reality  of  its  life  in  the  past  has  been 
vindicated  by  the  fact  that  it  has  passed  on  from  phase 
to  phase  even  though  the  mass  of  its  adherents  bade  it 
rest  upon  each  in  turn  as  a  finality.  But  the  Creed 
will  be  short,  broadly  marked,  portable.  The  Organ- 
ization will  be  no  more  complex  than  is  necessary  to 
carry  the  creed  abroad.  The  initial  Experience  will 
be  nothing  beyond  the  sincere  desire  for  right  conduct. 
All  will  issue  in,  and  be  tried  by  their  issue  in  right 
living.  For  this  purpose  and  by  this  means  Jesus  will 
become  more  and  more  available.  In  this  way  Chris- 
tianity will  be  seen  to  be  both  far  easier  and  far  more 
difficult  than  it  has  appeared  since  the  Apostolic  days ; 
easier  because  more  intelligible  by  the  moral  nature 
to  which  it  addresses  itself,  and  more  difficult,  because 
that  manner  of  life  which  He  taught  and  exemplified 
is  only  possible  to  supreme  faith. 


SCEIPTUEE,  INSPIKATIOK  AND  AUTHOKITY 


YI 

SCEIPTUEE,  INSPIRATION   AND   AUTHORITY 

Ten  years  ago  Professor  Thayer,  of  Harvard, 
spoke  thus  to  his  hearers : 

"But  inquirers,  you  tell  me,  demand  certainties. 
They  clamor  for  immediate  and  unequivocal  answers. 

"  Doubtless,  and  overlook  the  fact  that  Divine  Wis- 
dom rarely  vouchsafes  such.  If  God's  Book  had  had 
the  average  man  for  its  author,  no  doubt  it  would 
have  abounded  in  direct  and  categoric  replies  to  all 
questions.  The  most  complicated  problems  of  time 
and  eternity  would  be  solved  by  a  process  as  simple 
as  the  rule  of  three  !  But,  alas !  impatient  souls,  His 
people  do  not  get  into  the  promised  land  that  way." 

Nothing  is  more  pathetic  than  the  centuries-long 
reluctance  of  Christians  to  admit  the  elemental  truth 
of  their  Master's  teaching.  He  came  to  set  His  peo- 
ple free,  but  they  shrinlt  from  the  responsibility  of 
freedom.  He  assured  them  that  they  were  no  longer 
servants,  but  children ;  whereupon  they  long  for  the 
minute  directions  which  a  master  gives  to  a  slave. 
In  a  word,  they  have  persistently  sought  for  an 
"Authority."  It  is  so  much  easier  to  live  by  rule 
than  to  live  by  spirit.  At  least  it  seems  to  be  easier. 
In  point  of  fact,  the  distinguishing  feature  of  the 
religion  of  Christ  is  that  it  vacates  all  external  mas- 
tership, turns  the  individual  soul  in  upon  itself,  and 

109 


110    SCRIPTURE,    INSPIRATION   AND   AUTHORITY 

declares  that  by  so  doing  it  will  find  itself  face  to  face 
with  God.  It  has  been  well  said  that  of  the  words 
which  express  religion,  neither  the  verb  "to  love" 
nor  "  to  believe  "  has  any  imperative  mood.  Chris- 
tianity is  loving  and  believing.  In  neither  can  any 
"  Authority  "  coerce,  not  even  God !  One  loves  the 
things  which  he  himself  finds  lovable ;  he  believes  the 
things  which  for  him  are  believable.  In  the  presence 
of  an  Authority  he  may  be  silent,  or  he  may  lie  to  the 
authority,  or  he  may  lie  to  himself,  but  the  absolute 
situation  remains  unchanged. 

There  have  been  three  conspicuous  pretenders  to 
the  monarch's  throne — the  Church,  the  Bible,  and 
Reason.  To  speak  more  accurately,  they  have  not 
been  pretenders  so  much  as  they  have  been  worthy 
monarchs  whose  sceptres  have  been  thrust  into  their 
reluctant  bands  by  prophets  who  have  known  the 
Master's  wish  in  the  case,  but  have  yielded  to  the 
people's  cry,  "  l^ay,  but  we  will  have  a  king  over  us." 
Each  of  these  has  in  turn  played  the  tyrant,  but  it 
has  always  been  because  the  people  would  have  it  so. 
Dr.  Martineau  has  championed  the  cause  of  Reason  as 
the  legitimate  occupant  of  the  throne  as  against  the 
claims  of  the  Church  and  the  Bible.  Cardinal  New- 
man has  fought  for  the  authority  of  the  Church.  A 
hundred  Protestant  champions  have  maintained  the 
Westminster  dictum  that  "  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old 
and  New  Testament  are  the  only  rule  of  faith  and 
practice."     With  all  reverence,  I  believe  and  say  that 


SCRIPTURE,    INSPIRATIOlSr   AND   AUTHORITY    111 

the  Master  would  have  cried,  "  A  plague  on  all  your 
houses ! "  I  would  not  be  misunderstood.  The 
Church,  the  Bible,  and  Human  Reason  all  have  their 
necessary  place  and  function  in  the  economy  of 
Christ's  religion.  But  that  function  is  not  properly 
stated  by  the  word  "authority."  Authorities  they 
are  not.  Guides,  interpreters,  if  you  will,  but  mas- 
ters, no. 

Four  centuries  ago  a  large  and  influential  portion 
of  Christendom  revolted  against  the  tyranny  of  the 
Church.  They  did  not  thereby  cease  to  be  Christians, 
nor  did  they  cease  to  be  Churchmen.  They  simply 
asserted  that  they  who  had  been  made  free  men  in 
Christ  Jesus  were  not  to  be  brought  into  bondage  by 
any  spiritual  master.  A  large  portion  of  the  Chris- 
tian world  believed  then,  and  believes  yet,  that  this 
revolt  was  a  rebellion  against  God.  They  cannot 
think  of  it  as  a  Reformation.  They  see  in  it  a  form 
of  that  same  lawlessness  which  caused  Satan  to  be 
cast  out  of  heaven.  This  is  fundamentally  the  ques- 
tion at  issue  between  Protestantism  and  Papalism. 
Strictly  speaking,  Rome  has  only  one  doctrine ;  that 
is,  Submit  yourself  to  authority.  Protestantism  is 
essentially  the  assertion  that  the  Christian  is  the 
friend  of  the  Master,  and  no  longer  a  servant  who 
knoweth  not  what  the  master  doeth.  This  position 
was  consistently  and  valiantly  maintained  by  the 
early  Reformers.  So  far  as  obedience  to  the  Church 
is  concerned,  they  have  not  yielded  yet.     Obedience 


112    SCRIPTURE,   liSrSPIRATION   AND    AUTHORITY 

to  the  Churches'  commands,  as  com7)iands,  cannot  to- 
day be  secured  in  any  portion  of  Protestantism.  It  is 
every  year  becoming  more  difficult  to  secure  by 
Eome, 

But  the  burden  of  freedom  is  very  onerous.  Be- 
fore the  second  generation  of  the  Reformers  had 
passed  away,  a  movement  had  set  in  which  had  for  its 
unconscious  purpose  to  set  the  Bible  upon  the  same 
throne  of  authority  from  which  the  Church  had  been 
rudely  thrust.  The  Bible  was  less  fitted  for  that 
office  than  the  Church  had  been,  nor  had  it  thereto- 
fore been  regarded  in  that  aspect  by  Catholic  tradi- 
tion. But  the  people  had  begun  once  more  to  cry, 
"Nay,  but  we  will  have  a  king  over  us."  It  was  then 
that  the  doctrine  of  "  Inspiration"  began  to  be  ex- 
ploited. The  Bible  was  first  enthroned  as  "author- 
ity," and  thereupon  its  "  inspiration "  was  urged  to 
establish  its  legitimacy.  The  whole  development  of 
the  dogma  lies  within  the  seventeenth  and  the  first 
half  of  the  eighteenth  century,  as  any  one  who  will 
take  the  trouble  may  read.  During  that  time  the 
XitercB  Scriptce  were  confirmed  in  a  position  which 
they  have  held  until  our  own  time.  The  Bible  came 
to  be  called  the  "Word  of  God."  It  became  a  pal- 
ladium and  a  charm.  The  theologian  thought  of  it  as 
a  complete  and  final  transcript  of  God's  law  and  pur- 
pose. The  common  people  adored  it  as  a  fetich.  It 
came  to  be  kissed  in  the  courtroom  as  the  sacred 
thing  wliich  alone  could  invoke  truth.     It  was  ap- 


SCRIPTURE,    INSPIRATION    AND    AUTHORITY     113 

pealed  to  as  not  only  the  ultimate  but  the  immediate 
arbiter  in  every  question  of  faith  and  conduct.  With- 
out its  presence  in  its  entirety  it  was  believed  that  no 
people  could  know  God.  By  its  distribution  it  was 
believed  that  that  gospel  could  be  spread  abroad 
whose  Founder  had  decreed  that  it  should  be  propa- 
gated only  by  the  contact  of  living  man  with  living 
man.  It  came  to  hold  the  place  in  Protestantism 
which  the  Koran  holds  in  Islam.  And  aU  this  with- 
out its  own  consent,  and  even  against  its  plain  pro- 
test! 

Just  now  a  large  portion  of  the  Protestant  world  is 
disturbed  by  what  it  thinks  to  be  a  breaking  away 
from  the  authority  of  the  Bible.  Is  the  apprehension 
justified  ?  What  has  caused  the  fear  ?  What  will  be 
the  outcome  of  the  movement  ?  Of  the  ultimate  issue 
there  can  be  little  question.  The  servant  will  be 
handed  down  out  of  the  seat  of  the  king.  The  Scrip- 
tures of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  are  the  product 
of  that  long  and  wide  movement  toward  God,  at  the 
centre  of  which  stands  "  God  manifest  in  the  flesh." 
The  Church  is  that  great  company  of  faithful  people, 
from  every  age  and  every  clime,  organized  and  un- 
organized, conscious  and  unconscious,  who,  by 
thought,  word,  and  deed,  contributed  to  the  bringing 
in  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  Bible  is  the  litera- 
ture of  a  movement.  The  movement  produced  the 
literature,  and  not  conversely.  The  movement  is 
superior  to  the  literature  and  controls  it.     The  litera- 


114     SCRIPTURE,    INSPIRATION    AND    AUTHORITY 

ture  gains  its  peculiar  character  from  the  unique 
quality  of  the  movement.  The  movement  is  the  mas- 
ter and  the  Book  is  the  servant.  Within  a  certain 
very  circumscribed  area  inside  the  Church,  and  within 
about  three  centuries  of  time,  the  servant  has  been 
unwisely  elevated  into  a  position  to  which  it  never 
claimed  title.  This  action  has  been  confined  solely  to 
a  portion  of  Protestantism  within  Great  Britain  and 
the  United  States.  The  task  now  is  to  remove  the 
Bible  from  the  unwarranted  place  assigned  to  it,  and 
to  do  this  in  such  manner  that  it  will  not  suffer 
diminution  of  the  honor  which  belongs  to  it  of  right 
and  in  its  own  place.     But  the  task  must  be  done. 

Two  classes  of  people  Avithin  the  nominal  frontier 
of  Protestantism  fiercely  oppose  the  doing  of  it. 
These  are,  first,  the  extreme  Protestants,  whose  whole 
fabric  of  religious  thought  is  so  based  upon  the  idea 
of  an  infallible  written  revelation  that  they  cannot 
conceive  the  fabric  standing  when  the  foundation 
should  be  withdrawn.  The  other  is  a  comparatively 
small  group  of  Churchmen  who  are  so  enamored  of 
the  very  principle  of  authority  in  religion  that  they 
cannot  abide  question  of  any  authority,  even  though 
it  be  one  of  which  they  themselves  take  small  heed. 
These  two  join  their  voices  in  an  outcry  against  the 
same  kind  of  dealing  with  the  Scripture  Avhich  has 
been  freely  allowed  always  and  everywhere  within 
the  universal  Church,  with  the  exception  of  the  limited 
time  and  area  above  mentioned.     But  the  majority  is 


SCRIPTURE,    INSPIRATION    AND    AUTHOPtlTY     115 

against  them.  All  Catholic  tradition  is  against  them. 
The  Bible  itself  refuses  to  side  with  them.  The  re- 
sult is  foregone. 

But  what,  then,  becomes  of  the  "  Doctrine  of  In- 
spiration "  ?  To  this  I  reply.  The  Catholic  Church  has 
no  doctrine  of  inspiration.  It  has  w^iat  it  believes  to  be 
a  fact.  But  it  has  never  defined  the  fact  or  elevated  it 
into  a  dogma.  Only  within  the  limited  time  and  area 
before  mentioned  has  this  been  done.  Hence  it  hap- 
pens that  only  within  that  area  is  the  present  perplex- 
ity felt.  The  Eastern  Church  cannot  comprehend  the 
difficulty.  The  Koman  Church  is  untouched  by  it. 
The  Anglican  Cliurch  is  disturbed  by  it  only  to  the 
extent  to  which  she  has  informally  committed  herself 
to  a  Protestant  dogma.  Officially  she  does  not  recog- 
nize any  dogma  of  inspiration.  She  is  content  with 
stating  what  books  are  included  within  the  sacred 
writings,  and  with  declaring  that  no  belief  is  to  be 
exacted  as  a  condition  of  membership  in  the  Church 
which  is  not  recognized  in  them. 

That  the  threescore  little  books  bound  up  together 
in  our  Bible  possess  a  unique  quality  has  always  been 
recognized  by  those  ^vho  were  qualified  to  discern 
that  quality.  It  is  because  they  possessed  this  qual- 
ity that  they  survived  while  tlieir  contemporary 
writings  have  perished.  But  the  name  by  which  this 
quality  shall  be  called  is  quite  another  matter.  The 
word  "  inspiration "  suited  the  fact  well  enough  so 
long  as  the  word  retained  its  original  indefiniteness  of 


116    SCRIPTURE,   INSPIRATION   AND    AUTHORITY 

connotation.  It  is  a  serious  question  now,  however, 
whether  it  can  be  happily  employed  within  the  area 
where  it  has  been  so  long  misemployed.  It  misleads. 
By  ancient  and  universal  usage,  "  inspiration "  was 
credited  to  certain  men  who  spoke  or  wrote.  By 
local  and  modern  usage,  inspiration  is  attached,  not  to 
the  men,  but  to  the  thing  spoken  or  written.  A  legiti- 
mate metonymy  has  created  an  illegitimate  dogma. 
That  certain  men  of  old  spake  as  they  were  moved  by 
the  Holy  Ghost  is  beyond  question.  But  the  impulse 
of  the  Spirit  of  Holiness  is  a  moral  and  not  an  intel- 
lectual one.  It  does  not  guarantee  accuracy,  but  it  is 
recognized  by  the  moral  sense  of  the  hearer.  This  is 
why  the  words  of  some  men  have  survived  and  are  a 
living  force  in  the  moral  movement  of  the  race.  The 
men  were  inspired. 

But  what  authority  shall  decide  which  men  have 
been  inspired,  and  what  writings  possess  the  unique 
quality  due  thereto  ?  I  reply,  no  external  decision 
can  determine.  No  decree,  no  council,  no  ol/iter  dicta, 
can  attach  the  label  "inspired  "  to  any  book  with  the 
certainty  that  it  will  adhere.  The  final  appeal  is  to 
the  Christian  consciousness.  When  that  has  spoken, 
a  General  Council  can  but  register  its  decree.  It  may 
be  that  in  certain  instances  its  voice  has  not  been 
waited  for,  or  that  it  has  been  constrained  by  ecclesi- 
astical pressure,  or  that  a  judgment  has  been  made  by 
a  passing  authority  against  its  silent  protest.  No 
doubt.     But  the  simple   fact   that  a  literature  frag- 


SCRIPTURE,    INSPIRATION    AND    AUTHORITY     117 

mentary,  incomplete,  undistinguished  by  literary  skill 
or  intellectual  brilliancy,  has  remained  through  the 
centuries  a  constant,  living  stimulus  and  corrective  to 
the  world's  conscience,  establishes  its  origin  from  the 
Spirit  of  Holiness.  It  is  true  that  the  Church  lived 
for  several  centuries  without  it;  that  it  would  not 
perish  were  the  Bible  to  be  lost.  This  is  but  to  say 
that  salvation  is  not  made  contingent  upon  the  ability 
to  read  and  write.  But  when  all  is  said,  the  fact  still 
remains  that  the  writings  which  we  call  sacred  are 
sacred.  Not  because  they  burst  into  the  world 
through  any  earthquake  of  divine  visitation,  not  be- 
cause they  are  sent  forth  by  any  mighty  blast  of 
ecclesiastical  wind,  but  because  in  them  speaks  the 
still,  small  voice,  at  the  sound  of  which  every  true 
prophet  and  man  of  God  covers  his  face.  What  au- 
thority they  possess  rests  upon  this  fact.  The  capac- 
ity to  inspire  is  the  only  and  the  sufficient  evidence  of 
inspiration. 

But  this  quality  which  they  possess,  they  possess  in 
unequal  degree.  Whether  or  not  any  may  j)erchance 
be  included  in  the  canon  which  possess  it  not  at  all 
only  time  can  show.  But  this  would  require  long 
time.  Even  a  possession  of  twenty  centuries'  tenure 
does  not  establish  an  indefeasible  title.  And  a  Gen- 
eral Council  in  the  thirtieth  century  would  have  just 
the  same  power  to  pronounce  the  Christian  judgment 
in  the  premises,  and,  if  need  be,  to  reverse  a  previous 
judgment  that  a  Council  of  the  jQfth  century  had  to 


118     SCRIPTURE,   INSPIRATION   AND   AUTHORITY 

reverse  one  of  the  third.  There  is  no  such  thing  as 
prescriptive  right  in  the  kingdom  of  Christ. 

If  it  be  objected  that  this  way  of  thinking  vacates 
the  Holy  Scriptures  of  all  divine  authority,  two  an- 
swers are  forthcoming.  The  first  is  that  this  is  the 
way  in  which  the  Church  throughout  all  the  centuries 
and  to-day  has  regarded  and  does  regard  them.  The 
only  exception  in  time  is  the  three  centuries  last  past, 
and  in  space  is  a  portion  of  the  Protestant  world  of 
Great  Britain  and  the  United  States.  The  other  an- 
swer is,  It  does  vacate  them  of  all  authority  except 
this  intrinsic  power  to  inspire.  It  rests  content  with 
the  doctrine  of  the  Apostle  that  "  every  God-breathed 
writing  is  profitable  for  teaching,  reproof,  correction, 
and  instruction  in  righteousness." 

In  righteousness;  not  in  science,  not  in  history, 
not  in  geography  or  ethnology.  To  this,  which  is  es- 
sentially the  Catholic  doctrine  of  Holy  Scripture, 
what  can  criticism  or  scholarship  do  ?  What  if  it 
should  appear  that  the  human  race  began  ages  before 
Eden,  or  that  Moses  did  not  write  the  Pentateuch,  or 
that  there  were  two  Isaiahs,  or  that  the  gospel  which 
goes  by  his  name  was  not  written  by  the  beloved  dis- 
ciple ?  Proof  of  these  things  would  no  more  touch 
the  intrinsic  quality  by  which  the  books  live  than  the 
discovery  that  the  alabaster  box  had  been  carved  at 
Babylon  and  not  in  Jerusalem  would  affect  the  fra- 
grance of  the  precious  nard  contained  therein. 

"We  have  come  to  a  time  in  the  history  of  the 


SCRIPTURE,    INSPIRATION    AND    AUTJlOUITY     119 

Christian  world  when  nothing  but  realities  will  be 
tolerated.  Only  those  things  can  be  accepted  as 
sacred  which  awake  the  sense  of  reverence.  Only 
those  things  are  inspired  which  can  themselves  inspire. 
There  need  be  no  fear  to  submit  the  Christian  Scrip- 
tures to  this  test ;  nor  need  any  one  f  utilely  imagine 
that  he  can  secure  exemption  for  them  from  this  test. 
I  would  add  a  word,  moreover,  about  the  attitude 
of  Churchmen  toward  this  question  of  Holy  Scripture. 
One  looks  with  a  mixed  feeling  of  amazement  at  the 
spectacle  of  the  Bishops  of  Springfield  and  western 
New  York  joining  their  voices  in  the  outcry  against 
Dr.  Briggs.  One  is  tempted  to  invoke  the  dead 
tongues  of  Newman  or  Ewer  or  De  Koven  to  warn 
them  that  they  are  shouting  with  the  wrong  side. 
Even  their  rage  at  Broad  Churchmen  ought  not  to 
seduce  them  to  tear  down  their  own  house.  The  gov- 
erning principle  of  that  which  is  called  the  Higher 
Criticism  is  the  belief  that  the  literature  of  the  historic 
Church  is  the  product  of  the  historic  Church.  But 
this  is  also  the  Catholic  doctrine  of  Holy  Scripture. 
The  High  Churchman  ought  to  see  that  if  the  ipsis- 
sima  verha  of  the  canon  be  erected  into  an  authority 
which  may  not  be  canvassed  without  sacrilege,  the 
real  foundation  for  the  Church's  order  and  structure 
will  be  vacated.  This  was  the  contention  of  the 
Elizabethan  High  Churchmen  against  the  Puritans. 
This  was  Hooker's  ground  in  his  reply  to  Travers  and 
Cartvvright,  and  he  writes  this  for  the  heading  of  his 


120    SCRIPTURE,   INSPIRATION   AND    AUTHORITY 

second  book  :  "  Concerning  their  position  who  urge 
reformation  in  the  Church  of  England,  namely,  that 
Scripture  is  the  only  rule  of  all  things  which  in  this 
life  may  be  done  by  men."  This  was  the  position  of 
Seabury  and  Hobart  and  Bishop  Hopkins.  I^one  of 
these  men,  I  can  but  believe,  would  have  permitted 
themselves  to  be  so  infatuated  with  the  principle  of 
"  authority  "  as  to  allow  themselves  to  become  the 
allies  of  the  descendants  of  the  Westminster  General 
Assembly. 

The  question  of  Holy  Scripture  is  one  which  the 
High  Churchman  who  knows  the  ground  tipon  which  he 
stands  is  not  vexed  by. .  It  does  not  touch  him,  so 
long  as  he  keeps  out  of  questionable  company.  It  is 
open  to  him  to  say  to  the  scholar,  "  God  speed  you, 
lay  bare  the  truth,  analyze  the  documents,  identify 
the  authors,  fix  the  dates,  lay  bare  contradictions, 
convict  the  spurious  if  there  be  such,  take  the  books  to 
pieces  and  arrange  the  parts  in  chronological  order  if 
you  can.  None  of  these  conclusions  can  touch  the 
thing  for  which  vje  use  and  revere  the  literature  of 
the  kingdom  of  God." 

But  if  neither  the  Church  nor  the  Bible  nor  the 
reflective  Reason  are  authorities  before  whom  the 
soul  must  bow  itself,  then  where  is  a  master?  At 
this  point  we  want  to  examine  more  carefully  the 
word  used.  There  is  a  fatal  confusion  in  the  popular 
use  of  the  word  "  authority."  I  have  used  the  word 
throughout  in  its  etymological  sense.     An  authority 


SCKIPTURE,   INSPIUATION    AND    AUTHOKITY     121 

is  a  master  who  can  get  himself  obeyed  under  pen- 
alty. In  the  region  where  this  discussion  moves,  only 
a  de  facto  sovereign  is  worth  considering.  A  mere  de 
jure  authority  is  of  no  consequence.  Now,  in  most 
of  the  discussion  concerning  the  "  Seat  of  Authority 
in  Eeligion,"  men  have  been  content  with  spinning 
academic  arguments  to  prove  the  legitimacy  of  this  or 
that  "  authority."  One  has  been  content  to  prove 
that  men  should  "  hear  the  Church  " ;  another,  to 
prove  that  "  the  Scripture  is  the  only  rule  of  faith 
and  practice "  ;  another,  "  that  men  should  be  gov- 
erned by  the  deliverances  of  right  Eeason."  They 
are  beautiful  arguments,  but  they  are  like  the  fine- 
spun pleas  of  the  nonjurors  for  the  "  divine  right"  of 
the  impotent  Stuarts.  "What  is  wanted  is  an  author- 
ity which  can  get  itself  obeyed  under  penalty.  And 
that  is  precisely  what  none  of  those  above  mentioned 
can  do.  My  quarrel  is  the  same  with  the  bibliolater, 
the  ecclesiastic,  and  the  rationalist.  They  all,  and  all 
alike,  sit  down  satisfied  when  they  have  reached  an 
authority  which  in  their  opinion  ought  to  be  final. 
What  difference  whether  it  ought  to  be  or  not,  if  it  is 
not? 

The  real  vice  of  all  these  champions  of  "  authority  " 
is  that  they  cannot  admit  the  reality  of  God  govern- 
ing directly.  They  have  the  feeling  that  a  moral 
cause  can  go  before  the  Almighty  only  on  appeal 
from  a  lower  court.  The  contention  of  Jesus  is  that 
God    has  original  jurisdiction,  and  that  He  has  ma- 


122    SCRIPTURE,    INSPIRATION   AND    AUTHORITY 

chinery  for  communicating  His  judgments.  This  is 
what  the  Jews  coukl  not  take  in.  They  lived  by 
"  authority."  The  priest,  the  lawyer,  and  the  scribe 
spoke  to  them  the  final  word.  When  Jesus  bade  them 
venture  immediately  into  the  presence  of  God  their 
Father,  they  were  shocked  and  scandalized.  His  dis- 
ciples, however,  gathered  courage  to  follow  Him,  and 
so  were  made  free  men  in  Christ  Jesus.  In  the  cen- 
turies since,  they  have  always  tended  to  grow  weary 
of  the  burden  of  liberty,  and  to  turn  to  the  eccle- 
siastic, the  scribe,  and  the  logician,  begging  to  be 
ruled. 

The  real  authority  in  the  moral  sphere  is  the  actual 
concurrence  of  the  will  of  God  with  the  moral  con- 
sciousness of  the  individual.  Whenever  this  concur- 
rence is  reached  in  any  particular  case,  the  individual 
recognizes  it.  He  may  not  obey  it,  but  that  is  be- 
cause he  prefers  to  bear  the  penalty  rather  than  to  do 
God's  will,  but  he  knows  that  the  King  has  spoken. 
He  know^s  it  just  as  the  organ-builder  knows  that  a 
pipe  speaks  the  right  note.  He  may  be  long  in  find- 
inff  the  note.  He  tries  it  with  the  octaves  above  and 
below  ;  he  tries  it  with  other  stops  and  combinations. 
For  a  time  there  are  discords  and  vibrations.  But  at 
last  the  pipe  gives  the  sound  which  the  tuner  has  been 
striving  for.  When  it  once  speaks  aright,  there  is  no 
longer  any  doubt.  The  music,  the  organ  and  the  ear  fit 
together,  and  the  player  has  tlie  same  certitude  of  mu- 
sical truth  that  he  has  of  his  own  being.     The  author- 


SCKIPTUKE,    INSPIRATION    AND    AUTHORITY     123 

ity  has  spoken.  In  the  moral  sphere  one  who  seeks 
finality  in  truth  and  duty  brings  a  question  before 
the  Eeason  to  test  its  reasonableness ;  before  the 
Bible  to  see  whether  or  nut  it  accords  with  the  moral 
movement  of  the  kingdom  of  God  ;  before  the  Church 
for  the  contemporary  opinion  of  the  brotherhood  of 
righteousness.  He  seeks  for  the  harmonious  testimony 
of  all  the  parts  of  the  whole  great  organ  of  life  that  his 
voice  is  attuned  to  the  music  of  God.  When  he  has 
found  it,  he  is  satisfied,  for  he  knows  what  is  truth 
and  what  is  duty. 

The  Church,  the  Bible,  the  Eeason,  are  ushers  to 
bring  the  soul  into  the  presence  of  the  King.  "Who 
asserts  for  them  an  authority  of  their  own  wrongs 
both  them  and  their  Maker. 


THE  FALL,-UPWARD 


YII 

THE  FALL, — UPWAED 

A  WELL-KNOWN  Writer  in  a  well-known  Keview 
lately  made  this  statement : 

"  It  is  easy  to  see  that  the  '  New  Theology '  is  about 
prepared  to  join  hands  with  Darwinianism,  and  oblit- 
erate the  doctrine  of  the  Fall  as  underlying  the  fact 
that  'the  "Word  was  made  flesh.' " 

It  is  the  peculiarity  of  the  "  l^ew  Theology  "  that  no 
one  is  officially  authorized  to  speak  for  it,  but  I  ven- 
ture to  think  that  the  above  statement  will  be  silently 
admitted  by  those  who  are  under  its  influence  as  being 
substantially  true.  I  venture  also  to  say  why  this 
judgment  is  accepted  by  those  in  whom  it  has  reached 
the  distinctness  of  a  judgment. 

The  existence  of  moral  evil  is  not  denied  by  any. 

There  are  in  the  field  three  theories  as  to  its  origin 
and  nature.  Of  course  these  theories  are  not  held  dis- 
tinctly and  unmixed.  The  same  person  may,  and,  in 
point  of  fact,  often  does,  hold  mutually  antagonistic 
fragments  of  different  theories  in  doctrine  and  philos- 
ophy and  may  be  as  strenuous  in  support  of  one  part 
of  his  contradictory  creed  as  of  another.  But  in  the 
case  before  us  the  three  theories  are  easily  separable, 
in  thought  at  least. 

127 


128  THE    FALL, — UPWARD 

(1)  The  first  is  that  of  what  for  convenience'  sake 
may  be  called  "  orthodoxy." 

According  to  it  there  was,  long  ago,  a  primeval 
world  which  was  a  paradise.  It  had  a  genial  climate 
and  a  fertile  soil.  No  ice-bound  oceans  or  burning 
deserts,  no  thorns  or  brambles,  no  predacious  beast  or 
pestilential  wind,  were  there.  The  world  was  young 
and  wholesome.  No  nerve  had  ever  thrilled  with 
pain,  nor  any  living  creature  looked  upon  the  face  of 
death.  The  plains  were  smiling  Avith  perennially 
golden  grain,  and  the  forest  bountiful  with  pendent 
fruit.  In  this  Paradise  God  walked,  and  was  lonely. 
In  it  He  set  the  newly  fashioned  Adam,  the  first  indi- 
vidual of  his  race.  Into  his  arms  He  graciously  gave 
the  maiden  Mother  of  us  all.  He  created  them  im- 
mortal. Their  wisdom  was  transcendant ;  their  inno- 
cence absolute. 

But  with  Adam  God  made  a  covenant.  The  matter 
of  the  agreement  was,  that  perfect  obedience  and  un- 
broken righteousness  would  be  rcAvarded  by  continual 
bliss,  and  warranty  against  pain  and  death ;  and  that 
for  disobedience  the  punishment  should  be  capital. 
The  parties  to  the  agreement  were  God  of  the  first 
part,  and  Adam  the  part}'^  of  the  second  part.  Adam 
did  not  enter  into  the  covenant  for  himself  alone,  but 
as  the  representative  of  all  his  race  yet  unbegotten. 
They  were  to  have  their  chance  in  him,  and  to  stand 
forfeit  if  he  failed.  (Whether  the  covenant  were  to 
remain  in  force  eternally,  or  whether,  after  a  certain 


THE    FALL, — UPWARD  129 

time  passed  in  obedience,  he  was  to  have  been  con- 
firmed in  an  indefeasible  right,  does  not  appear.)  The 
simple  test  for  the  first  man's  power  of  moral  endur- 
ance was  to  be  his  abstention  from  a  certain  attractive 
kind  of  fruit  in  the  garden  where  he  dwelt.  An  in- 
sidious tempter  appeared  from  some  unknown  and  un- 
suspected quarter,  enlisted  the  more  pliable  nature  of 
Eve  on  the  side  of  disobedience,  and  through  her  broke 
down  the  moral  resistance  of  man.  He  failed  in  the 
test,  and  catastrophe  unspeakable  was  let  loose  !  Smit- 
ten suddenly  with  shame  and  pain,  the  offenders  crept 
away  already  moribund.  The  voice  of  God  rolling  in 
thunder  discovered  their  hiding-place.  The  flashing 
lightning  of  an  offended  heaven  burned  between  them 
and  their  bower.  The  jealous  earth  shot  up  from  her 
bosom  the  "  upas  and  the  deadly  nightshade  "  among 
the  kindly  forest,  and  choked  the  wheat  with  thorns 
and  brambles.  The  wild  beasts,  filled,  for  the  first 
time  with  cruel  rage  and  hunger,  rent  and  devoured 
one  another.  The  natures  of  the  offenders  themselves 
underwent  a  sudden  ferment,  which  left  them  trans- 
formed and  totally  depraved.  Their  unborn  children 
not  only  inherited  the  taint,  but  were  bound  by  all  the 
penalties  appended  to  the  original  contract  broken  by 
their  father  and  representative.  Thus  death  physical 
and  moral,  the  depravity  of  every  son  of  Adam,  and 
all  the  thousand  ills  that  flesh  is  heir  to,  both  in  this 
world  and  in  any  world  yet  to  come,  are  all  the  out- 
come of  that  transaction  which,  in  popular  religion  and 


130  THE    FALL, — UPWARD 

in  technical  theology,  is  named  "The  Fall."  Most 
Continental  and  American  theology  is  based  upon  this 
notion.  So  unconventional  a  thinker  as  Dr.  Bushnell 
has  a  strange  chapter  induced  by  the  theory.  If  death 
literally  came  by  Adam,  how  then  to  account  for  its 
undoubted  dominion  over  the  lower  animals  for  ^ons 
before  Adam  was  made  ?  The  "  dragons  weltering  in 
their  prime  "  lived  by  tearing  one  another,  and  were 
so  equipped  by  nature  that  they  could  not  live  other- 
wise. Dr.  Bushnell,  seeing  this  difficulty,  hits  upon 
the  ingenious  theory  of  what  he  calls  "  The  anticipa- 
tive  consequences  of  sin."  ^  That  is,  the  sin  which  was 
to  be,  cast  its  shadow  backward,  and  covered  the  earth 
from  its  beginning ! 

The  theory  before  us  cannot  be  more  clearly  stated 
than  in  the  words  of  the  "  Larger  Catechism "  ap- 
pended to  the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith :  "  The 
'  Fall '  brought  u2)on  mankind  the  loss  of  communion 
with  God,  His  displeasure  and  curse,  so  that  we  are  by 
nature  children  of  wrath,  bond  slaves  to  Satan,  and 
justly  liable  to  all  punishment  in  this  world  and  the 
world  to  come." 

Now,  whence  came  this  notion  ?  In  the  Old  Testa- 
ment there  is  no  allusion  to  it  whatever.  There  every 
case  of  moral  obliquity  is  referred  to  tlie  deliberate 
and  wanton  choice  of  the  person  offending.  His  fault 
is  never  modified,  or  the  quality  of  his  guilt  deemed  to 
be  affected,  by  his  relation  to  Adam.     He  is  in  every 

'  Nature  and  Supernatural,  ch.  vii. 


THE    FALL, — UPWARD  131 

case  accounted  worthy  or  blameworthy,  not  for  what 
he  is  qua  man,  but  for  what  he  does  of  his  own 
choice.^ 

The  "  Fall "  is  never  referred  to  hy  Jesus  in  any 
form.  If  His  words  and  precepts  stood  alone  in  the 
New  Testament  the  transaction  would  be  overlooked 
completely.  He  concerns  Himself  with  the  springs  of 
human  conduct  as  they  exist  now.  He  uncovers  and 
fortifies  ncAV  and  obscured  motives.  He  refers 
righteousness  to  the  indwelling  of  the  Spirit  of  God, 
but  never  refers  sin  to  the  indwelling  of  the  spirit  of 
Adam. 

In  the  Apocalypse,  which  unfolds  the  last  scenes  in 
the  drama  of  humanity,  there  is  no  reference  to  a 
great  catastrophe  at  its  beginning,  and  the  denouement 
would  seem  to  be  incompatible  with  such  a  first  act. 

The  Catholic  Creeds  are  entirely  silent  concerning 
it.  The  Articles  of  the  Christian  Faith,  assent  to 
which  is  a  condition  precedent  to  membership  in  the 
Christian  Church,  have  nothing  whatever  to  say  con- 
cerning the  transaction  known  as  the  "Fall." 

From  all  this  it  seems  evident,  that  if  the  "New 
Theology  "  sits  somewhat  loosely  to  this  theory,  it 
does  not  thereby  argue  itself  to  be  irreverent  toward 
the  highest  authority  or  indifferent  to  fundamental 
truth. 

The  portion  of   Christian  Scripture  by  which  the 

'Edersheim:  "Life  of  Christ,"  vol.  i.,  book  L  '*/<  is  entirely  un- 
known also  to  Rabbinical  Judaism." 


132  THE    FALL, — UPWARD 

theory  has  been  always  upheld  is  St.  Paul's  Epistle  to 
the  Romans,  the  fifth  chapter,  beginning  at  the 
twelfth  verse.  To  the  untheological  reader  the  mean- 
ing is  sufficiently  evident.  The  propagandist  of  the 
new  Faith  declares  that  his  principal,  Jesus  of  Naz- 
areth, is  of  divine  origin,  and  has  moral  relations 
with  every  human  being.  But,  just  as  all  men  are  af- 
fected by  the  character  and  actions  of  their  original 
ancestor  "  Adam,"  so  the  whole  race  stands  affected 
by  the  character  and  actions  of  the  Second  "  Adam." 
This  seems  to  be  all  that  the  writer  had  in  mind.  He 
is  concerned  with  the  position  of  Jesus,  and  only  uses 
the  accepted  story  of  Adam  as  an  illustration  and 
analogy,  good  for  what  is  good.  But  instead  of  being 
allowed  to  remain  in  the  subordinate  position  of  an 
analogy,  it  has  unfortunately  been  elevated  into  a 
capital  position  among  Christian  dogmas. 

The  history  of  the  dogma  is,  in  rough  lines,  easily 
traced.'  It  was  developed  by  that  great  system 
builder,  Augustine.  It  passed,  together  with  the  rest 
of  his  theology,  into  general  acceptance  in  the  Western 
Church.  It  was  elaborated  into  curious  detail  during 
the  busy  idleness  of  the  scholastic  period.  Dante 
popularized  the  story  of  the  Edenic  Paradise  for  the 
Latin  races,  as  did  Milton  for  the  English-speaking 
people.  Luther,  the  Augustinian  monk,  brought  the 
theory  with  him  from  his  cloister.  Calvin  accepted  it 
from  his  master  Augustine,  and  made  it  the  starting- 

'  Hagenbach  :  *'  History  of  Doctrine,"  p.  59. 


THE    FALL, — UPWAKD  133 

point  of  his  sj^stem.  Through  these  various  channels 
it  has  come  since  the  Eeformation  into  the  popular 
mind  to  be  the  accepted  Christian  teaching  concerning 
the  moral  status  of  man. 

That  the  theory,  both  in  itself  and  in  its  conse- 
quences, is  entirely  untenable  would  seem  to  be  evi- 
dent from  merely  stating  it.  It  is  so  well  intrenched, 
however,  that  more  than  this  is  necessary.  To  any 
one  who  has  come  under  the  influence  of  that  mode 
of  thinking  known  as  evolutionary,  such  a  castas- 
trophe  as  that  of  the  "  Fall "  is  a  priori  incredible. 
Such  a  thing  is  out  of  analogy,  both  natural  and  spir- 
itual. On  the  face  of  it  (if  it  be  so  read),  it  is  a  case  of 
sudden  and  violent  degradation  interjected  between 
two  periods  of  steady  progress.  Up  to  the  date  of 
the  "  Fall,"  and  from  that  date  forward,  the  progress 
is  undenied.  Instances  of  degradation,  both  in  in- 
dividuals and  families,  are  very  common,  but  they  dif- 
fer from  this  alleged  one  in  that  they  are  slow,  final, 
and  irretrievable.  Their  subjects  are  left  stranded  on 
one  side  of  the  stream  of  progress.  There  is  no 
farther  use  for  them,  and  they  cease  to  be.  The  Mil- 
tonic  "  Fall,"  on  the  other  hand,  is  sudden,  inconclu- 
sive, and  the  penal  cause  assigned  is  no  sufficient 
rationale  in  the  absence  of  any  moral  or  religious  ob- 
ligation to  accept  the  fact.  The  "  total  depravity  " 
supposed  to  have  been  the  consequence  of  this  trans- 
action is  not  a  fact,  and  never  has  been.  A  human 
being  without  inherent  moral  goodness — inherent  in 


loi  THE    FALL, — UPWARD 

the  same  way  as  his  humanity  itself — is  something  no 
one  has  ever  seen.  It  has  been  imagined  in  technical 
theology,  but  its  actual  counterpart  is  to  be  looked  for, 
not  in  any  man  or  woman,  but  in  Mephistopheles  or  a 
Houyhnhnm.  Apart  from  the  somewhat  artificial 
language  of  the  pulpit,  neither  the  idea  nor  the  fact 
ever  occurs. 

The  associated  dogma  of  inherited  guilt  is  practi- 
cally obsolete  also.  True,  it  survives  in  the  standards 
of  some  Christian  bodies,  but  it  has  ceased  to  be  a 
conviction  to  which  one  may  appeal  to  influence  con- 
duct. What  preacher  would  dare  to  assert  boldly, 
"You  deserve  to  be  damned  for  your  share  in 
Adam's  act  of  disobedience  "  ? 

The  dogma  is  no  longer  held  on  the  authority  of 
Augustine,  or  rejected  with  Pelagius ;  it  has  simply 
fallen  out  of  sight  in  consequence  of  its  intrinsic  un- 
worthiness  and  essential  immorality.  The  "  New 
Theology  "  does  not  accept  it  or  reject  it ;  it  passes  it 

by. 

(2)  The  theory  has  in  some  quarters  been  rudely 
displaced  by  another,  v/hich  seems  to  be  radically  op- 
posed to  it.  Indeed,  the  place  occupied  by  it  is  the 
one  most  strenuously  fought  for  by  all  the  forces  at 
present  in  the  field.  The  Theist,  the  Secularist,  the 
Evolutionist,  or  the  Christian, — whichever  one  is  able 
to  capture  and  hold  this  ground, — possesses  the  key  to 
the  battle  of  modern  thought.  What  is  the  ground 
and  origin  of  human  Right  and    Wrong?     "Whoso 


THE    FALL, — UPWARD  135 

holds  the  key  to  this  will  win  the  battle.  For,  prac- 
tically, men  value  morals  above  all  else.  It  is  ad- 
mitted on  all  hands  that  the  sense  of  right  and  wrong 
does  exist,  and  that  it  is,  in  its  degree,  at  any  rate,  the 
distinguishing  mark  of  man.  But  the  real  question  is, 
"  Whence  comes  it,  and  in  what  consists  its  binding 
force  ? "  Those  of  the  extreme  Right  say  it  is  an 
original  endowment  of  man  from  God,  formerly  per- 
fect, but  now  shattered  and  untrustworthy.  Those  of 
the  extreme  Left  say,  without  hesitation,  that  it  is  a 
faculty  which  has  been  slowly  developed  in  man  out 
of  the  interaction  of  himself  and  his  fellows  with  their 
surroundings.  In  the  crude  barbarianism  which  they 
consider  to  be  the  original  status  of  the  race,  certain 
actions  were  quickly  found  to  tend  to  the  general  wel- 
fare, while  certain  other  actions  were  found  to  work 
detriment  to  the  tribe.  The  first  sort  of  course 
tended  to  the  popularity,  and  the  second  brought  pain 
or  danger  to  the  individual  j)roducing  them.  The 
glow  of  satisfaction  produced  in  the  doer  of  helpful 
things  encouraged  him  to  the  habit  of  such  actions. 
Murder,  theft,  adultery,  having  been  found  to  be  dan- 
gerous to  the  community,  were  warmly  reprehended. 
This  public  sense  of  dislike  to  the  deeds  reacted  upon 
the  individuals  who  felt  it,  gradually  became  fixed  in 
each  one,  and  was  transmitted  to  his  descendants.  It 
had  its  origin  in  the  public  weal.  It  emerges,  how- 
ever, generations  afterward,  in  a  permanent  faculty, 
which  '•  had  lost  its  memory  and  changed  its  name." 


136  THE    FALL, — UPWARD 

Nor  has  it  remained  the  simple  faculty  it  was  when,  it 
first  became  self-conscious.  Long  afterward  it,  in  Mr, 
Matthew  Arnold's  happy  figure,  came  to  be  touched 
by  the  fire  of  Emotion,  and  burst  into  the  flame  of 
Religion.  Since  the  death  of  the  late  Professor  Clif- 
ford, this  theory  has  not  had  another  so  able  and  un- 
compromising an  advocate.  With  certain  modifica- 
tions due  to  his  more  cautious  and  judicious  habit  of 
mind,  it  is  the  doctrine  of  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer,  In 
popular  scientific  periodicals  it  is  assumed  to  have 
been  demonstrated.  It  has  found  a  lodgment  in 
the  text-books  of  schools.  It  is  the  basis  of  action 
for  "  Societies  for  Ethical  Culture."  The  theory  is 
claimed  to  be,  in  Professor  Clifford's  language,  "a 
scientific  basis  for  morals."  That  very  prevalent 
habit  of  mind  which  abhors  an  unsolved  problem  as 
nature  abhors  a  vacuum,  receives  and  rests  upon  it 
with  peculiar  satisfaction.  Wherever  this  theory  and 
the  popular  notion  of  the  "  Fall  "  are  sole  rivals  claim- 
ing entertainment  by  educated  men,  this  one  is  almost 
certain  of  a  Avelcome. 

And  this,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  it  is  at- 
tended by  the  very  gravest  difiiculties,  both  scientific 
and  moral.  The  more  sober-minded  evolutionists, 
whether  Christian  or  Secular,  do  not  accept  it.  They 
do  not  consider  it  scientific.  The  facts  in  the  case 
cannot  be  coordinated  under  it.  The  savage  state 
where  the  conscience  is  supposed  by  the  holders  of  it 
first  to  emerge  is  precisely  the  place  where  the  pos- 


TUE    FALL, — UPWARD  137 

sessor  of  moral  sensibility  would  be  most  unfit  to  sur- 
vive. Where  might  is  right,  right  is  doomed  to  death. 
Among  unmoral  creatures,  any  variation  in  the  direc- 
tion of  morality  tends  toward  the  extinction  of  its 
possessor.  The  faculty  coming  into  existence  there  is 
compelled  by  the  exigency  of  the  case  to  commit  hari- 
kari.  It  is  "  too  good  to  live."  "  The  survival  of  the 
fittest"  is  an  irrefragable  law,  which  may  not  be 
suspended  even  in  the  interest  of  moral  theory. 

Then,  again,  the  induction  upon  which  its  advocates 
base  the  scientific  theory  of  morals  is  open  to  the 
grave  suspicion  of  having  been  arranged  in  the  inter- 
est of  the  theory.  In  the  nature  of  the  case  the  facts 
are  difficult  to  come  by,  and  one  cannot  help  suspect- 
ing that  the  same  skill  (as  of  Sir  John  Lubbock,  e.g.) 
which  arranges  them  in  one  way  could  just  as  easily 
sort  and  arrange  them  so  as  to  produce  an  entirely  dif- 
ferent result.  Within  the  historic  period,  at  any  rate, 
there  has  not  as  yet  been  forthcoming  any  instance  of 
a  tribe  or  people  making  moral  advance  without  the 
aid  of  light  brought  to  them  ah  extra.  In  many  in- 
stances a  very  high  degree  of  civilization  has  been  at- 
tained to  by  their  unaided  development.  A  Yenus  di 
Milo,  and  a  code  of  Roman  Law,  have  proven  them- 
selves to  be  within  reach,  but  not  a  Sister  of  Charity, 
or  a  John  Baptist. 

Present  facts  are  also  against  the  theory.  There  is 
no  constant  relation  between  knowledge  and  goodness, 
nor  is  there  any  evidence  of  a  tendency  now  on  the 


138  THE    FALL, — UPWARD 

part  of  the  vicious  to  learn  righteousness  by  the  bit- 
terness of  their  experience  in  sin.  The  theory,  indeed, 
is  discredited  by  the  eagerness  with  which  the  chronic 
wrongdoer  accepts  it.  Anarchists,  Socialists,  Inger- 
sollites, — the  whole  ignoble  company  of  questionable 
morality — hail  it  as  truth.  One  cannot  avoid  the 
feeling  that  it  is,  at  least  in  part,  welcome  because  it 
lightens  the  stress  of  moral  obligation.  The  charge  of 
Lacordaire  would  seem  to  be  at  least  colorable,  that 
"  it  consoles  us  for  our  vices  by  calling  them  neces- 
sities, bringing  in  as  a  witness  to  this  a  corrupt  heart 
disguised  in  the  mantle  of  science." 

(3)  But  the  two  theories  above  indicated  are  not 
the  only  claimants  to  a  hearing  upon  the  question  of 
the  moral  progression  of  man.  A  third,  contained 
compendiously  in  Genesis  ii.  and  iii.,  and  writ  large  in 
the  whole  Christian  Scriptures,  we  believe. 

The  story  in  Genesis  is  too  familiar  to  need  rehears- 
ing. It  will  suffice  to  point  out  that  it  assumes  to  be 
a  distinct  account  of  a  veritable  occurrence.  It  is 
sharply  separated  from  what  precedes  and  follows  in 
the  narrative,  though  evidentl}'^  related  to  both.  Like 
the  portion  of  the  story  which  precedes  it,  it  moves  with 
majestic  stride,  an  aeon  in  a  paragraph,  with  space  for 
a  year  of  God's  days  between  verses.  It  is  couched  in 
a  language  so  oriental  and  so  poetic  that  even 
Augustine  warned  against  dangerous  literalness 
here. 

The  first  chapter,  and  to  the  fourth  verse  of  the 


THE    FALL, — UPWARD  139 

second,  sketches  the  whole  of  creation,  from  the  chaotic 
nebulous  mist  to  the  introduction  of  the  creature  fash- 
ioned in  the  image  of  God,  which  is  called  "  Adam," 
i.e.,  man.  This  sketch  is  the  mighty  frame  into  which 
all  that  comes  after  is  to  be  fitted.  This  having  been 
completed,  it  proceeds  to  recount  the  history  of  the 
creation  in  which  the  whole  long-drawn  movement  has 
culminated.  It  refers  most  briefly  to  the  preparation 
of  the  earth  to  his  use,^  connects  him  as  to  his  physical 
side  with  matter,^  endows  him  with  life,^  and  then 
enters  upon  the  history  of  the  develoiwient  of  marl's 
nioral  and  religious  life,  which  is  the  subject  matter 
of  the  Old  and  Kew  Testament  Scriptures.  This 
progress  is  conceived  to  be  by  a  series  of  continually 
recxtrring  selections.  The  first  of  these  is  recorded  in 
the  story  before  us.  There  is  no  intimation  there  that 
"  Adam  "  and  "  Eve  "  were  the  absolute  beginning  of 
the  race.  There  is  nothing  in  the  word  Adam  to  in- 
dicate whether  it  means  man,  or  is  a  proper  name  for 
an  individual.  It  may  mean  either.  In  point  of  fact, 
it  is  used  in  both  senses — as  the  word  "  day  "  is  used 
both  for  the  whole  time  covered  by  the  creative  proc- 
ess and  for  one  of  its  periods.  For  the  writer  of 
Genesis,  having  for  his  purpose  to  narrate  the  moral 
development  of  the  race,  it  was  sufficient  to  begin 
where  that  began.  To  this  end  he  states  that  God 
took  a  man  and  a  woman, — {i.e.,  a  family), — set  them 
in  circumstances  where  the  new  faculty  with  which 

'  Gen.  ii.  5.  » lb.  7.  » lb.  7. 


140  THE    FALL, — UPWARD 

He  had  endowed  them  would  have  its  proper  and 
necessary  environment.  That  this  selection  left  to  the 
natural  process  of  degradation  those  who  were  not 
chosen  would  seem  probable  from  the  following  con- 
siderations : 

1.  It  is  in  the  analogy  of  God's  method  of  dealing 
with  men  since  history  has  recorded  the  same.  Thus 
Genesis  occupies  itself  only  wdth  the  fortunes  of  Seth 
and  his  line.  Cain,  his  brother,  is  permitted  to  wander 
to  the  land  of  Nod,*  where  he  founded  a  nation, — a 
nation  which  passed  through  the  stages  of  pastoral 
life,^  concentration  in  cities,^  developed  the  industries, 
blossomed  into  art,  burst  into  music,^  and  then  passed 
forever  out  of  sight  and  hearing.  Abraham  is  selected 
from  his  Acadian  followers,  while  they  are  left  to  com- 
plete the  cycle  of  a  civilization  untouched  by  any  di- 
vine Spirit,  and  then  sink  into  their  decay.  Isaac  is 
taken,  and  Ishmael  is  left.  Jacob  is  chosen,  and  Esau 
rejected, — and  so  following.  "  One  shall  be  taken,  and 
the  other  left "  seems  to  have  been  the  method  of 
God's  procedure  always.  Selection  implies  a  cor- 
responding rejection.  The  Bible  is  as  remorseless  as 
science  itself.  For  the  purpose  of  Scripture,  moral  fit- 
ness is  the  test.  The  calling  of  Adam  would  seem  to 
be  only  the  first  of  many  such  selections,  not  differing 
in  kind  from  that  of  Abraham. 

2.  In  certain  obscure  nooks  and  corners  of  the 
earth,  there  exist  small  groups  of  creatures,  which, 

"Gen.  iv.  10.         'lb.  iv.  20.  ^  n,.  jy.  17.         *Ib.  iv.  22. 


THE    FALL, — UPWARD  141 

while  among  men,  seem  not  to  be  of  them.^  They 
have  in  their  persons  and  their  languages  traces  of 
better  days.  They  seem  to  have  been  left  stranded 
by  the  stream  of  development.  So  low  in  the  scale  of 
intelligence,  so  destitute  of  moral  sense,  are  they,  that 
it  is  diflScult  for  one  to  look  upon  them  and  believe 
that  they  belong  to  the  race  which  has  the  first  Adam 
at  its  start  and  the  second  Adam  at  its  culmination. 

3,  Traditions  of  the  "  Fall "  are  only  found  among 
those  whose  ancestry  can  be  traced  to  a  common 
origin,  or  who  have  come  in  contact  with  the  race  of 
Adam  at  some  point  in  their  history. 

A  family  is  chosen  by  God,  and  led  by  His  provi- 
dence into  a  fertile  and  well-watered  country,^  rich  in 
gold  and  precious  stones,^  surrounded  by  the  flora  and 
fauna  ^  which  are  the  concomitants  always  of  civiliza- 
tion.' In  these  surroundings  occur  that  chapter  in 
human  history,  which,  whether  relatively  or  absolutely 
the  beginning,  is,  at  any  rate,  a  supreme  epoch.  It  is 
the  beginning  of  human  religion. 

The  story  sounds  far  away,  and  strange.  To  one 
who  is  accustomed  to  the  precision  of  modern  scien- 
tific statements,  it  even  seems  grotesque, — an  echo  of 
the    childish   stories    of   a   youthful    world !     Taken 

1  For  example :  the  Buslimen,  the  Australian  aborigines,  the 
Veddahs  of  Ceylon,  etc. 

« Gen.  ii.  8.  '  lb.  ii.  11.  ■•  lb.  ii.  9,  20. 

*  It  seems  hardly  necessary  to  point  out  that  ' '  Garden  ' '  in  this  con- 
nection is  a  misleading  term.  The  idea  of  extremely  limited  space, 
which  the  word  conveys,  is  foreign  to  the  story,  "Paradise,"  in  its 
classical  use,  is  better.     The  idea  is,  an  expanse  of  park-like  territory. 


142  THE    FALL, — UPWARD 

broadly,  however,  it  manifests  an  insight  which  on 
any  theory,  save  the  Christian,  it  would  be  folly  to 
look  for  in  such  an  early  time.  It  rests  morality  upon 
those  clear  foundations  where  the  broad  communis 
sensus  of  intelligent  and  upright  men  instinctively 
look  for  it.     It  declares : 

1.  A  personal  God  who  can  speaTc. 

2.  A  huTnan  faculty  which  can  hear. 

3.  A  jpower  of  will  which  can  choose. 

4.  That  the  essence  of  wrongdoing  consists^  not  in 
damage  to  the  community^  hut  in  disobedience  to  God. 

This  new  family  of  Adam,  alone  of  all  creatures, 
having  reached  the  stage  of  knowing  right  and  wrong, 
have  their  newborn  faculty  nourished  and  developed 
by  food  convenient,  and  in  a  fit  environment.  In  the 
garden  of  the  world  they  feed  upon  the  fruit  of  the 
"  tree  of  knowledge  of  good  and  evil."  "  Forbidden  " 
fruit  it  is  indeed, — food  which  may  be  eaten  only  at  a 
dreadful  risk.  Knowledge  brings  judgment  always, 
and  must  pay  the  price  of  its  being.  When  moral 
faculty  rises  to  the  state  of  self-consciousness,  brute- 
like innocence  is  left  behind  forever.  The  way  of  re- 
turn is  closed  as  by  Cherubim  with  fiery  swords. 
Profound  degradation  is  possible  thereafter,  but  not 
along  the  lines  by  which  the  creature  came.  lie  can 
move  downward  but  not  backward.  His  fellowship 
is  no  longer  with  the  gentle  creatures  of  the  garden, 


TUE    FALL, — UPWARD  143 

whose  nature  he  heretofore  shared,  but  with   their 
Maker  and  their  God, 

"And  the  Lord  God  said:  Behold  the  man  is  be- 
come as  one  of  us,  to  know  good  and  evil.  And  now, 
lest  he  put  forth  his  hand  and  take  of  the  tree  of  life 
and  live  forever, — therefore  the  Lord  God  sent  him 
forth  from  Eden ;  and  He  placed  at  the  East  of  the 
garden  Cherubim,  with  flaming  sword  which  turned 
every  way." 

"  And  so  I  live,  you  see, 
Go  through  the  world,  try,  prove,  reject, 
Prefer,  still  struggling  to  effect 
My  warfare  ;  happy  that  I  can 
Be  crossed  and  thwarted  as  a  man , 
Not  left,  in  God's  contempt,  apart, 
With  ghastly,  smooth  life,  dead  at  heart, 
Tame  in  Earth's  paddock  as  her  prize  !  " 

Of  the  outcome  of  the  transaction,  there  can  be  no 
doubt.  It  was  clearly  great  gain, — maybe  a  falling 
short  of  the  best  then  possible,  but  clearly  a  rise  above 
what  went  before.  Something  better  still  did  come 
into  the  field  of  moral  vision,  even  then.  The  "  Tree 
of  Life,"  the  possibility  of  immortality,  was  there. 
But  it  came  into  sight  only,  a  long  way  off,  and  out 
of  reach.  Only  as  a  memory  and  a  hope  did  it  survive 
in  the  tedious  steps  of  progress,  until,  in  the  fullness  of 
time,  the  perfect  Man  "  brought  life  and  immortality 
to  light." 

Moreover,  there  comes  crawling  upon  the  stage,  the 
wily,  ignoble   representative   of   moral   Evil.     When 


144:  THE    FALL, — UPWARD 

man  emerges  as  a  moral  being,  he  must  take  his  place, 
perforce,  in  the  league  of  spiritual  states.  He  has 
thenceforth  to  do  with  many  interests.  He  is  a  "be- 
ing of  large  discourse,  looking  before  and  after."  It 
is  no  fantastic  oriental  conceit  which  introduces  Satan 
to  the  first  man  who  could  comprehend  his  forked 
speech.  That  man  'tnust  confront  the  Eternal  Nay  in 
virtue  of  his  station.  The  doctrine  of  supernatural 
evil  is  developed  in  the  Christian  Scriptures  pari 
j>assu  Avith  the  process  of  redemption.  The  Christian 
smiles  when  he  hears  the  fact  of  such  existence  called 
in  question.  He  is  quite  aware  that  in  the  Secular 
Creed  there  is  no  Prince  of  Darkness.  But  he  knows 
also  that  there  be  a  thousand  things  not  dreamed  of 
by  that  philosophy.  He  reads  hopefully  the  obscure 
prophecy  of  better  things  to  be  attained  through  much 
pain,  by  the  seed  of  the  woman,  and  he  knows  that 
much  of  that  evil  is  neither  brute  nor  human.  If  it 
were,  he  should  despair  of  the  race  at  the  outset.  His 
solace  and  his  ground  of  hope,  when  the  brute  within 
him  is  turbulent  and  the  spirit  of  man  is  overladen, 
is  the  consideration  that  "it  is  not  I,  but  sin  that 
dwelleth  in  me." 

The  first  of  these  theories,  briefly  sketched,  is  pro- 
pounded by  the  popular  and  so-called  "  Orthodoxy  "  ; 
the  second  by  the  Secular  Science  ;  the  third  by  the 
Christian  Scriptures.  The  first  is  moribund.  The 
second  is  dangerous.  The  third  is  substantially  true. 
Make  what  allowance  one  will  for  the  obscurity,  the 


THE    FALL, — UPWARD  145 

puerility,  of  the  story,  the  fact  still  remains,  that  the 
moral  progress  of  the  race  has  been  but  the  develop- 
ing of  the  picture  there  sketched  in  broad  outline. 
He  whose  way  of  thinking  has  been  most  profoundly 
impressed  by  the  great  thought  of  Evolution  compre- 
hends it  best.  He  finds  himself  caught  in  the  sweep 
of  a  majestic  movement  similar  in  kind  to  that  which 
he  has  followed  from  the  monad  to  the  man.  Here 
again,  as  at  other  times,  the  progress  halted,  either 
helpless  or  at  fault,  and  God  vouchsafed  the  gift  of 
a  new  motive  force.  Here  His  Gift  is  nothing  less 
than  the  inbreathing  of  His  own  spirit.  It  endows 
its  recipient  with  that  Divine  quality  in  virtue  of 
which  he  is  capable,  under  suitable  conditions,  of 
being  "born  again."  It  accounts  for  the  complex 
and  contradictory  impulses  which  contend  in  the 
arena  of  the  soul.  It  accounts  for  the  old  man  as 
well  as  the  new.  It  tells  him  the  name  and  origin 
and  limitation  of  the  strange  tempter  which  whispers 
in  the  secret  chambers  of  his  heart.  It  brings  him 
in  sight  of  immortality,  and  bids  him  long  and 
strive  mightily  therefor.  It  bids  him  work  amid 
briers  and  thorns ;  but  when  he  lifts  up  his  face  he 
hears  that  "  he  has  become  as  one  of  us."  It  binds 
him  to  God.  It  gives  him  sanction  for  conduct,  and 
hope  for  infinite  progression.  It  sets  him  in  the  sweep 
of  a  dramatic  movement.  It  accounts  for  the  faults 
of  the  patriarch,  for  the  faith  of  the  apostle,  and  the 
faultlessness  of  the  Perfect  Man, 


THE  E6lE  of  belief 


VIII 

THE   EOLE   OF   BELIEF 

It  is  high  time  that  we  Christians  ask  ourselves  so- 
berly, "  Just  what  do  we  believe  ? — and  just  why  do 
we  believe  it  ?  "  It  will  not  do  to  reply  that  we  be- 
lieve what  the  Christian  Church  has  always  believed  ; 
for  that  is  not  true.  Let  one  undertake  the  study  of 
the  religious  life  of  the  United  States,  for  instance,  be- 
ginning, let  us  say  at  1825,  and  he  will  have  no  great 
difficulty  in  setting  down  item  by  item  what  were  the 
beliefs  generally  held  at  that  date.  There  was  prac- 
tical unanimity  as  to  what  was  called  "  the  essentials 
of  Christian  truth."  Even  the  violent  storms  of  con- 
troversy which  swept  over  the  surface  of  society  did 
not  disturb  the  beliefs  which  lay  below.  The  "  Chris- 
tian System "  was  quite  sharply  conceived.  There 
were  a  few  infidels  who  attacked  it  with  clumsy  op- 
position. There  were  a  few  Unitarians  who  sought  to 
modify  its  theological  statements  in  one  particular. 
There  were  large  numbers  respectfully  indifferent  to 
it.  But  the  System  itself  was  conceived  of  alike  by 
alh  The  everyday  creed  of  the  everyday  man  would 
have  run  something  thus  : 

"  I  believe  that  there  is  a  God. 

"  I  believe  that  He  made  the  Avorld,  out  of  nothing, 

149 


150  THE   ROLE   OF   BELIEF 

by  a  series  of  fiats,  in  six  natural  days,  four  thousand 
and  four  years  ago. 

"  I  believe  that  He  made  Adam  and  Eve  out  of  the 
dust  of  the  earth, 

"  I  believe  that  in  Adam's  fall  we  sinned  all. 

"  I  believe  that  Jesus  Christ,  the  second  person  of 
the  Trinity  offered  Himself  to  the  angry  first  person 
of  the  same  Trinity  to  be  a  victim  to  ajipease  the  just 
wrath  which  could  in  no  other  way  be  satisfied. 

"I  believe  that  by  His  suffering  and  death  that 
wrath  has  been  turned  aside  from  such  persons  as  will 
avail  themselves  of  the  substitute  thus  offered  for 
them. 

"  I  believe  that  all  those  who  do  thus  avail  them- 
selves will  go  when  they  die  to  a  heaven  where  they 
will  be  forever  happy ;  while  those  who  do  not  avail 
themselves  of  it  will  be  sent  to  hell  where  they  will 
be  forever  miraculously  kept  alive  so  that  they  may 
endure  endless  torment. 

"  I  believe  that  if  people  are  good  they  will  be  ever- 
lastingly rewarded,  and  that  if  they  are  bad,  they  will 
be  everlastingly  punished. 

"  I  believe  all  this  because  the  Bible  says  so. 

"  I  believe  the  Bible  because  it  is  an  inspired  revela- 
tion of  God's  will  and  purpose  concerning  men." 

Concerning  these  articles  there  was  practically  no 
diversity  of  opinion.  They  were  assumed  almost  as 
axioms.  Superimposed  upon  these  was  a  mass  of  dog- 
mas which  were  believed  with  almost  equal  unanimity. 


THE   EOLE   OF   BELIEF  151 

The  descent  of  the  whole  human  race  from  a  single 
pair  of  progenitors ;  the  universality  of  the  Xoachian 
Deluge ;  the  immediate  divine  institution  of  the 
"  Mosaic  System "  ;  the  literal  f  ulliUment  of  the 
Prophecy  ;  the  literal  infallibilit}^  of  the  Bible. 

Above  and  beyond  all  these  there  was  an  indefinite 
mass  of  "  denominational  doctrines,"  ranging  from  the 
most  exalted  philosophical  tenets,  such  as  foreordina- 
tion,  to  the  paltriest  detail  of  denominational  practice, 
such  as  the  Amish  tenet  that  hooks  and  eyes  and  not 
buttons  ought  to  be  used  to  fasten  Christian  men's 
clothes. 

This  is  a  very  bald  but  a  true  statement  of  the  actual 
belief  of  the  people  of  this  country  at  the  end  of  the 
first  quarter  of  this  century.  Of  course  every  item  of 
this  creed  was  challenged  by  somebody,  but  the  thing 
to  be  noted  is  this  :  there  were  no  other  religious  be- 
liefs generally  extant.  It  is  true  that  the  Episcopa- 
lians kept  on  repeating  their  Apostles  and  Xicene  sym- 
bols, but  there  were  few  of  them  and  even  they,  for 
the  most  part  had  for  their  week  day  and  working 
doctrines  about  the  same  that  other  people  had. 

Such  was  the  theological  situation  in  1825.  Any 
one  who  will  take  the  trouble  to  read  through  piles  of 
old  sermons,  tracts,  controversial  pamphlets,  and  such 
like  can  reconstruct  it  for  himself.  Another  quarter 
century  passed,  and  the  peoples'  beliefs  remained  un- 
changed. Still  another  passed  bringing  us  to  1875, 
and  signs  of  change  begin  to  appear.     The  change 


152  THE   ROLE   OF   BELIEF 

came  much  later  in  this  country  than  in  Europe. 
During  the  twenty  years  between  1850  and  1870  the 
people  of  this  country  had  their  minds  and  hearts  filled 
with  questions  of  another  sort.  They  were  in  the 
shadow  of  the  over  gathering  clouds  of  war,  or  they 
were  dazed  by  its  flashing  lightning  and  rolling  thun- 
der, or  they  were  gathering  themselves  up  slowly  from 
the  prostration  in  which  the  tempest  left  them.  During 
this  period  their  religion  was  largely  emotional.  It 
expressed  itself  in  passionate  cries  to  God  the  Deliv- 
erer. The  immediate  stress  of  living  was  so  exacting 
that  men  had  little  energy  and  less  inclination  to  ex- 
amine the  contents  of  their  faith. 

But  forces  had  meanwhile  begun  to  be  dimly  felt 
which  were  destined,  during  the  quarter  century  now 
drawing  to  a  close,  to  revolutionize  the  religious  be- 
lief of  the  people.  German  students  had  begun  that 
criticism  of  the  Bible  which  has  compelled  not  only  a 
new  definition  of  Inspiration  but  an  altogether  dif- 
ferent way  of  esteeming  and  using  the  sacred  books. 
The  new  science  of  Geology  had  gone  far  enough  to 
forecast  the  destruction  of  the  accepted  Biblical 
Chronology  and  to  indefinitely  expand  each  of  the 
Creation  Days.  The  new  Historical  Method  had  gone 
far  enough  to  set  the  ancient  Bible  stories  side  by 
side  with  ancient  legends.  The  Doctrine  of  Evo- 
lution had  won  its  way  so  far  as  to  compel  a  new  defi- 
nition of  Creation.  The  modern  passion  of  philan- 
thropy  had   begun   to   modify    the   theology    of   the 


THE   ROLE   OF   BELIEF  153 

Atonement  by  its  deeper  feeling  of  God's  love  and  its 
higher  estimate  of  man's  worth. 

Few  realize  how  profound  and  far  reaching  has 
been  the  revolution  in  religious  belief  during  our  own 
generation.  Luther  or  Calvin,  Anselm  or  Thomas, 
even  Augustine  or  Pelagius,  could  they  have  come 
alive  in  1850  and  learned  the  English  tongue  would 
not  have  found  anything  strange  or  unintelligible  in 
the  religious  speech  of  the  people.  But  if  they  had 
postponed  their  revisitation  until  now  they  would 
find  themselves  hopelessly  bewildered,  they  would 
find  people  treating  as  palpably  false  things  which  they 
assumed  to  be  palpably  true.  They  would  find  that 
man's  conception  of  God  and  theology  was  changed 
because  the  conception  of  the  universe  and  its  science 
has  changed. 

"Who  to-day  believes  that  God  created  the  universe 
in  six  natural  days  by  immediate  command  ?  or  that 
Noah's  Flood  Avas  universal  ?  or  that  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures are  a  literal  and  infallible  rescript  of  God's  word  ? 
or  that  the  Hebrew  System  was  delivered  all  in  a  piece 
to  Moses  ?  Or  that  the  work  of  Christ  is  to  be  ex- 
plained by  calling  it  an  equivalent  in  pain  paid  to 
cancel  God's  bond  of  justice  ? 

We  had  better  face  the  facts.  The  conditions  of 
living  are  changed,  and  the  change  has  come  with 
amazing  suddenness.  On  the  physical  side  of  life  as 
great  a  change  has  occurred  between  the  time  of 
George  Washington  and  to-day  as  between  his  time 


154  THE   HOLE   OF   BELIEF 

and  that  of  Cyrus.  But  life  is  of  one  piece.  It  is 
idle  to  suppose  that  it  may  be  transformed  in  its  arts, 
its  mechanics,  economics,  science,  ethics,  and  remain 
untouched  in  its  religion.  It  is  not  to  the  point  to  de- 
clare at  this  stage  with  whatever  solemnity  that 
"  Christ  is  the  same  yesterday,  to-day,  and  forever." 
Of  course  He  is.  God  is  changeless.  So  is  nature. 
But  it  does  not  follow  that  yesterday  saw  the  whole 
of  God  ;  or  that  the  adjustments  which  it  achieved  to 
the  side  of  God  which  it  saw  are  the  final  ones. 


GOD,  EVEN  OUE  GOD 


IX 

GOD,   EVEN   OUR  GOD 

The  only  starting-point  to  religious  belief  is  the 
fact  of  the  moral  sense.  The  only  means  of  transit 
from  the  closed  ring  of  l^ature  to  anything  which 
may  lie  above,  or  outside  of,  or  beneath  N^ature,  is  to 
be  sought  for  here.  The  everyday  man  believes  that 
the  mandates  of  conscience  are  obligatory.  The  man- 
dates themselves  may  be  confused  or  may  be  hurtful, 
judged  from  the  standpoint  of  human  good.  They 
may  be  regarded  or  disregarded,  obeyed  or  disobeyed, 
as  the  case  may  be.  But  the  individual  never  really 
doubts  that  it  speaks  with  authority.  "  We  ought  to 
do  this,  we  ought  not  to  do  that."  These  distinctions 
are  felt  to  proceed  from  some  source  either  within  or 
without,  which  has  a  right  to  speak.  The  faculty  by 
which  one  distinguishes  between  right  and  wrong  is 
as  obvious  a  fact  as  is  the  existence  of  the  faculty  by 
which  one  distinguishes  between  sweet  and  bitter. 
The  power  to  distinguish  is  taken  as  suflBcient  evi- 
dence that  the  distinction  itself  is  a  real  and  valid 
one.  What  is  the  ground  and  origin  of  right  and 
wrong  ?  Whoso  holds  the  key  to  this  will  Avin  the 
battle.  It  is  admitted  on  all  hands  that  the  sense  of 
right  and  wrong  does  exist.     But  the  real  question  is 

157 


158  GOD,    EVEN   OUR   GOD 

whence  comes  it,  and  in  what  consists  its  binding 
force  ?  Some  will  reply  "  It  is  an  original  endowment 
vouchsafed  to  man  by  God,  and  is  a  possession  pe- 
culiar to  man."  Many,  on  the  other  hand,  assert  and 
believe  that  it  is  a  faculty  which  has  been  slowly  de- 
veloped in  man  out  of  the  interaction  of  himself  and 
his  fellows  with  their  surroundings.  In  the  crude 
barbarism  which  they  conceive  to  be  the  original 
status  of  the  race,  certain  actions  were  quickly  found 
to  tend  to  the  general  welfare,  while  certain  other 
sorts  of  action  were  found  to  work  detriment  to  the 
tribe.  The  first  sort,  of  course,  tended  to  popularity, 
and  the  second  brought  pain  or  danger  to  the  indi- 
vidual producing  them.  The  glow  of  self-satisfaction 
produced  in  the  doer  of  helpful  things  encouraged 
him  to  a  habit  of  such  actions.  Murder,  theft, 
adultery,  having  been  found  to  be  dangerous  to  the 
community  were  warmly  reprehended.  This  public 
sense  of  dislike  to  such  deeds  reacted  upon  the  indi- 
vidual who  felt  it,  and  gradually  became  fixed  in  each 
one  and  was  transmitted  to  his  descendants.  It  had 
its  origin  in  the  public  weal.  Generations  afterward 
it  emerges  as  a  permanent  faculty  which  has  lost  its 
memory  and  changed  its  name. 

It  is  contended  also  that  at  least  the  rudiments  of  a 
moral  sense  are  discernible  in  animals  much  below  the 
rank  of  man.  This  opinion  seems  to  be  steadily  gain- 
ing ground  among  those  who  have  the  right  to  an 
opinion  on  the  subject.     No  one  can  read  the  account 


GOD,   EVEN   OUR  GOD  159 

of  the  patient  experiments  and  observations  conducted 
upon  the  lower  animals  by  Mr.  Darwin,  Mr.  Romane, 
or  Sir  John  Lubbock,  without  being  impressed  with 
the  feeling  that  the  actions  of  the  animals  which  they 
describe  are  not  different  in  kind  from  the  actions  of 
men  which  are  determined  upon  by  means  of  the  moral 
sense.  This  conviction  has  caused  grave  disquiet  in 
the  minds  of  many  religious  people.  It  seems  at  first 
sight  to  break  down  the  last  barrier  of  distinction  be- 
tween man  and  beast.  It  appears  to  degrade  the  con- 
science from  its  high  status  as  the  voice  of  God  to  the 
unreasonable  instincts  of  the  brute.  I  think  the  dis- 
quiet is  unwarranted.  "Whatever  may  be  the  final  de^. 
cision  as  to  the  origin  of  the  moral  faculty,  the  really 
important  thing  to  be  considered  is  the  fact  of  its 
present  existence.  Is  the  validity  of  my  decision  be- 
tween the  morality  of  two  actions  rendered  any  the 
less  trustworthy  because  my  dog  is  capable  of  making 
decisions  which  seem  to  spring  from  the  same  motive  ? 
The  reply  is.  They  jire  no  less  trustworthy  than  are 
the  deliverances  of  my  mathematical  faculty  although 
a  crow  is  competent  to  count  three.  Whatever  the 
faculty  shall  be  seen  to  come  from,  or, — to  speak  more 
accurately, — by  whatever  method  God  has  brought  it 
into  being,  the  faculty  is  here,  and  men  do  trust  it. 
That  is  sufficient.  But  why  do  they  trust  it  ?  Why 
is  right  bounden  and  wrong  banned  ?  It  can  only  be 
because  there  is  some  fundamental  and  eternal  dis- 
tinctioji  to  which  the  moral  faculty  makes  its  appeal.   It 


160  GOD,   EVEN   OUR   GOD 

seems  to  me  as  unreasonable  to  think  that  the  faculty 
of  conscience  should  have  been  developed  if  there  be 
no  objective  fact  for  it  to  deal  with,  as  it  would  be  to 
suppose  that  the  faculty  of  sight  should  have  been  de- 
veloped if  there  were  no  such  thing  in  the  physical 
universe  as  light.  The  conscience  leads  to  something. 
But  to  what  ?  The  general  reply  is  "  To  God."  But 
really  one  is  not  very  much  farther  along  when  he  has 
made  this  reply,  for  the  question  at  once  comes  up 
"What  does  one  mean  by  God."  Here  is  where  a 
confusion  exists  which  renders  valueless  an  enormous 
amount  of  thought  and  speech  concerning  religion. 
It  is  thoughtlessly  assumed  that  all  who  say  "  God  " 
mean  by  it  the  same  thing,  that  God  is  a  well  defined 
object,  like  the  sun,  for  example,  and  that  whenever 
His  name  is  spoken  the  word  connotes  the  same  thing 
for  all  men.  l!^o  mistake  could  be  greater.  It  is 
probably  the  fact  that  no  two  men  now  and  within 
Christendom  have  in  mind  precisely  the  same  thing 
when  they  use  the  word  "  God."  And  it  is  still  more 
evident  that  the  use  of  this  word  has  changed  enor- 
mously during  the  progress  of  the  centuries  past.  In 
understanding  the  Bible  for  example,  much  perplexity 
Avould  be  avoided  if  this  simple  fact  were  borne  in 
mind.  It  is  true,  of  course,  that  the  God  of  Abraham, 
Isaac  and  Jacob, — the  God  of  the  living  and  the  dead, 
— is  in  His  own  person  unchangeable.  But  it  does  not 
follow  that  Abraham's  conception  of  God  was  the 
same   as   Jacob's,  or   that   Jacob's  Avas   the  same  as 


GOD,   EVEN   OUR   GOD  161 

Isaiah's,  or  that  Isaiah's  was  the  same  as  that  of  St. 
Paul.  One  has  only  to  read  the  earlier  parts  of  the 
Old  Testament  to  see  that  the  na'ive  conceptions  of 
Jehovah  which  were  entertained  by  those  who  wor- 
shipped Him  were  such  as  would  be  now  unsatisfac- 
tory even  for  a  Christian  child.  To  their  thought  He 
was  the  God  of  gods.  But  the  gods  over  whom  He  was 
supreme  were  thought  of  by  them  as  actually  existing 
personages.  Their  God  was  conceived  of  as  differing 
from  these  in  certain  things,  but  also  as  like  to  them 
in  many  other  things.     Says  Professor  Piepenbring : 

"  They  represented  Him  to  themselves  under  the 
form  of  man.  According  to  the  Biblical  narratives 
God  visits  Abraham  Avith  two  companions  ;  He  accepts 
the  hospitality  that  the  patriarch  offers  Him ;  He  con- 
verses with  him  and  Sarah,  then  goes  away  toward 
Sodom,  accompanied  by  His  host,  to  whom,  on  the 
way,  He  makes  known  His  purpose  to  destroy  the 
guilty  cities.  He  forms  man  out  of  the  dust  of  the 
ground,  as  an  artist  would  do;  He  breathes  into  his 
nostrils  the  breath  of  life;  He  plants  a  garden  in 
Eden ;  He  takes  a  rib  of  the  man  to  make  the  woman, 
and  carefully  closes  up  the  flesh  in  place  of  it ;  He 
rests  from  the  work  of  creation  when  He  has  finished 
it.  After  the  fall  He  appears  in  the  garden  of  Eden ; 
He  walks  through  it ;  He  calls  Adam  and  Eve ;  He 
informs  them  of  the  penalties  that  will  overtake  them ; 
then  He  makes  them  garments  of  skin  and  clothes 
them.  He  closes  the  door  of  the  ark  upon  Noah. 
He  smells  the  pleasant  odor  of  the  burnt-offering  that 
the  latter  offers  Him.  He  engages  in  a  hand-to-hand 
conflict,  like  a  man,  Avith  Jacob.  He  attacks  Moses 
in  the  night  and  attempts  to  kill  him ;  He  speaks  to 
him  as  one  person  to  another ;  He  buries  him  after  his 
death ;  He  pronounces  the  ten  words  of  the  decalogue, 


162  GOD,   EVEN   OUR   GOD 

and  engraves  them  on  tables  of  stone.  He  raises  His 
hand  to  take  an  oath.  It  is  only  necessary  to  read  a 
few  pages  of  the  prophets  or  the  Psalms  to  be  con- 
vinced that  God  is  regarded  as  possessing  all  the  mem- 
bers and  functions  of  the  human  body.  He  is  even 
said  to  hiss,  to  cry,  to  laugh,  to  sleep  and  awake. 

"  It  is  clear  that  in  the  prophets  and  the  Psalms 
these  expressions  belong  to  the  poetic  style.  But 
originally,  and  even  at  a  later  date  in  the  mouth  of 
thepeojyle,  they  were  not  merely  rhetorical  ;  they  cor- 
responded to  the  imperfect  ideas  that  were  current  re- 
specting the  Deity.  AVhen  the  narratives  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch, from  which  we  have  taken  the  examples 
above  cited,  were  composed,  they  were  taken  in  their 
literal  signification.  We  think  that  even  at  the  time 
when  the  original  narrators  borrowed  them  from 
popular  tradition  to  stereotype  them  in  writing,  they 
were  still  generally  taken  in  this  sense." 

It  required  two  thousand  years  for  the  Hebrew 
people  to  work  out  its  conception  of  God.  That  proc- 
ess was  for  them,  as  it  is  for  all  people  at  all  times, 
at  once  a  discovery  and  a  revelation.  God's  revela- 
tion of  Himself  always  lies  open  before  the  eyes  of  all 
men.  Nevertheless,  He  is  hid  from  all  men  until 
they  discover  Him  for  themselves.  •  God  teaches  men 
religion  as  wise  men  teach  their  children  knowledge. 
That  is,  they  put  their  children  in  the  way  to  learn  for 
themselves.  The  obstacle  in  the  way  of  imparting  all 
knowledge,  whether  by  the  Father  in  heaven  or  the  fa- 
ther on  earth  is  not  that  he  does  not  possess  the  knowl- 
edge, but  that  the  pupil  can  only  take  it  in  and  make 
it  his  own  by  his  own  labor,  thought  and  experience. 
The  Old  Testament  is  the  fragmentary  and  incomplete 


GOD,   EVEN   OUR   GOD  163 

record  of  the  multitudinous  ways  in  which  the  men  of 
old  felt  after  God  if  haply  they  might  find  Him, 
though  He  was  not  far  from  every  one  of  them.  In 
his  "  God  and  the  Bible  "  Mr.  Matthew  Arnold  has 
traced  this  process  and  well  summed  up  its  result. 
Probably  no  man  will  do  it  better  or  more  truly  for 
many  a  day  to  come.  In  his  well-known  phrase  "  A 
Power,  not  ourselves,  which  makes  for  righteousness," 
he  sums  up  the  faith  of  Israel.  Unfortunately  he 
stops  at  that  point,  forgetting  that  the  Christian 
world  has  passed  immeasurably  beyond  that  formula. 
"  God,  who  in  times  past,  in  divers  parts  and  in 
sundry  manners  spake  by  the  prophets,  hath  in  the 
last  days  spoken  by  His  Son." 

But  Mr.  Matthew  Arnold  is  not  the  only  Christian 
man  who  stops  content  with  the  Hebrew  God.  Most 
of  the  confusion  and  doubtfulness  into  which  the 
Christian  Avorld  has  fallen  would  have  been  avoided  if 
the  God  of  popular  belief  had  come  to  be  the  God  of 
our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ.  I  am  led  to  be- 
lieve that  the  God  of  popular  thought  is  the  God  of  the 
Hebrews,  and  not  even  their  truest  thought  of  Him. 
He  is  an  oriental  potentate,  the  King  of  Kings  and 
Lord  of  Lords.  He  sits  upon  a  throne  in  some  remote 
heavenly  palace,  magnifical  exceedingly,  but  far,  far 
away.     He  is  Ihe  lSupreme]Ruler,  who  conducts  the 

affairs  of  the  nn i vprsflj_ATri pi rp^  n f1  m i nisIhgrsJnRt.i p.p^  ex- 
alts and  casts  down,  rewards  and  punishes  according 
to  his  own  arbitrary  decrees.     Says  Mr.  John  Fiske: 


164  GOD,   EVEN   OUE   GOD 

"  I  remember  distinctly  the  conception  which  I  had 
formed  when  five  years  of  age.  I  imagined  a  narrow 
oifice  just  over  the  zenith,  with  a  tall  standing-desk 
running  lengthwise,  upon  which  lay  several  open 
ledgers  bound  in  coarse  leather.  There  was  no  roof 
over  this  oflBce,  and  the  walls  rose  scarcely  five  feet 
from  the  floor,  so  that  a  person  standing  at  the  desk 
could  look  out  upon  the  whole  world.  There  were 
two  persons  at  the  desk,  and  one  of  them — a  tall, 
slender  man,  of  aquiline  features,  wearing  spectacles, 
Avith  a  pen  in  his  hand  and  another  behind  his  ear — 
was  God.  The  other,  whose  appearance  I  do  not  dis- 
tinctly recall,  was  an  attendant  angel.  Both  were 
diligently  watching  the  deeds  of  men  and  recording 
them  in  the  ledgers.  To  my  infant  mind  this  picture 
was  not  grotesque,  but  ineffably  solemn,  and  the  fact 
that  all  my  words  and  acts  were  thus  written  down, 
to  confront  me  at  the  day  of  judgment,  seemed  natur- 
ally a  matter  of  grave  concern. 

"  If  we  could  cross-question  all  the  men  and  women 
we  know,  and  still  more  all  the  children,  we  should 
probably  find  that,  even  in  this  enlightened  age,  the 
conceptions  of  Deity  current  throughout  the  civilized 
world  contain  much  that  is  in  the  crudent  sense  an- 
thropomorphic. Such,  at  any  rate,  seems  to  be  the 
character  of  the  conceptions  with  which  we  start  in 
life,  although  in  those  whose  studies  lead  them  to 
ponder  upon  the  subject  in  the  light  of  enlarged  ex- 
perience, these  conceptions  become  greatly  modified." 

I  incline  to  think  that  the  conception  of  God  which 
has  been  until  lately  generally  current,  is  derived 
from  the  Hebrew  prophets,  from  the  habit  of  thought 
and  speech  which  belong  to  monarchy,  from  Milton 
and  Dante,  and  but  little  from  Moses  or  St.  Paul.  Until 
lately  this  conception  of  God  produced  no  intellectual 
distress.     It  satisfied  the  sense  of  reverence,  it  stirred 


GOD,   EVEN   OUR   GOD  165 

a  feeling  of  awe,  it  provided  potent  sanctions  for  con- 
duct. But  it  did  all  these  because  it  fitted  in  with 
the  accepted  ideas  concerning  nature  and  man. 
"  God  "  and  "  Nature  "  are  correlative  terms.  They 
must  be  adjusted  to  one  another.  If  anything  occurs 
to  seriously  modify  the  contents  of  either  term  the 
equation  ^is  tjirown  out  of  joint.  Dpubt,  distress,  per- 
plexity  must  prevail  until  the  equilibrium  shall  be 
restored.  This  is  precisely  what  has  occurred. 
"Within  a  generation  has  transpired  the  greatest  men- 
tal revolution  within  the  history  of  human  thought. 
The  whole  conception  of  Nature  has  been  trans- 
formed. Its  origin,  its  laws,  its  methods,  its  goal,  are 
thought  of  from  a  new  standpoint.  But  as  a  conse- 
quence the  old  idea  of  God  and  the  new  idea  of  Na- 
ture are  out  of  joint.  Nature  has  been  rationalized. 
Christianized,  but  the  popular  God  remains  the  He- 
brew Yaveh. 

This  change  in  the  situation  has  been  powerfully 
hastened,  if  not  produced,  by  the  spread  of  the 
doctrine  of  Evolution.  The  popular  thought  about 
God  is  in  process  of  change.  Until  lately  men 
thought  of  Him  as  having  His  seat  at  some  re- 
mote and  inaccessible  region  in  space  and  time. 
From  there  He  emerged  at  a  definite  point  in  the  past 
and  caused  a  universe  to  be  where  before  emptiness 
had  been.  During  a  "Creative  Week"  He  labored 
like  a  cunning  artificer,  finished  His  work,  pronounced 
it  very  good,  rested  and  withdrew.     Orthodoxy  was 


166  GOD,   EVEN   OUR   GOD 

alarmed  and  indignant  when  first  called  upon  to  ex- 
pand these  creative  days,  first  into  centuries,  and 
then  into  aeons.  It  piques  itself  upon  having  been 
able  to  effect  this  extension  without  disaster  to  itself. 
But  the  average  educated  man  has  since  some  time 
abandoned  this  way  of  thinking  altogether.  He  has 
come  to  believe  that  time  with  God  is  all  of  one 
piece,  that  He  works  continually,  and  that  He  works 
not  from  without  but  from  within,  that  He  is  not  re- 
mote or  apart  from  the  universe  and  never  has  been, 
that  He  is  in  and  behind  and  through  all  things,  proc- 
esses and  forces,  not  identified  with  them,  but  ap- 
prehensible apart  from  them.  So  far  as  men  are  now 
theistic  they  think  of  God  immanent.  That  is  to  say, 
they  do  so  in  every  sphere  except  the  sphere  of 
technical  Theology.  But  the  formulated  Theology  of 
"Western  Christendom  was  builded  about  the  other 
mode  of  conceiving  God.  The  decrees  of  Councils 
have  this  in  common,  they  think  of  a  transcendent 
and  not  an  immanent  God.  The  Evolutionary  phil- 
osophy can  only  conceive  of  God  immanent.  It 
thinks  of  Him  as  bearing,  in  a  way,  the  same  relation 
to  the  universe  that  the  soul  does  to  the  body^  The 
soul  is  not  the  body,  nor  is  it  the  product  of  the  body, 
nor  is  it  to  be  thought  of  as  ceasing  with  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  body.  But  it  is,  so  far  as  we  can  know, 
conditioned  in  its  manifestation  upon  the  body.  So 
men  are  steadily  coming  to  think  concerning  God. 
They  can  no  longer  think  of  Him  as  "  coming  "  to  the 


GOD,   EVETT   OUR   GOD  167 

universe  as  from  a  distance.  Xo  more  do  they 
identify  Iliiu  with  the  universe.  They  see  that  in 
His  essence  He  must  transcend  the  universe  as  mind 
transcends  matter.  But  they  see  Him  in  the  universe 
or  they  do  not  see  Hun  at  all.  Thej^are  impatient  of 
thejittledfifinitions  ot  the  1ittle_catechisms  whigk^- 
scribe  Him  as  "  a  spirit,  infinite,  eternal  and  un- 
changeable  in  being,  ^\asdom,  power,  holiness,  justice, 
goodnessandjrutli?^^  Possibly  they  have  no  better 
definition  to  offer,  but  only  a  more  reverent  silence. 
^Nevertheless,  they  must  think  of  Him  in  terms  which 
fit  with  their  thought  of  Nature.  Probably  Mr. 
Fiske  in  his  luminous  little  book  on  "  The  Idea  of 
God,"  has  said  it  as  well  as  the  current  thought  about 
God  is  likely  to  be  said  for  a  long  time  to  come. 

Jt  may  as  well'^  confegsed^_that  this  way  of  con- 
ceiving  God  is  unsajjt^i^^yt^iany  and  irritating 
to  not  a  few.  It  is  not  nearly  so  clearly  cut,  sharply 
defined  and  easily  presentable  in  thought  as  the  one 
which  it  supersedes.  That  one  is  simple,  portable,  al- 
ways available  for  the  practical  needs  of  teacher  or 
exhorter.  It  is  charged  against  this  one  that  it  is 
vague,  elusive,  and  in  places  inconsistent.  To  this 
charge  two  retorts  are  possible.  The  first  is,  this  is 
the  God  of  St.  John,  St.  Paul  and  Jesus.  The  second 
is,  it  is  better  to  conceive  vaguely  of  a  true  God  than 
precisely  of  a  false  one.  But  the  fact  remains  that  a 
man  born  and  reared  under  the  evolutionary  way  of 
thinking  about  God,  man,  and  nature,— that  way  which 


168  GOD,    EVEN    OUR   GOD 

has  possession  of  the  centres  of  learning,  which  is  in 
the  text-books  of  public  schools,  and  which  colors  pop- 
ular speech, — can  no  more  rest  content  with  the  cur- 
rent notion  of  God  than  he  could  present  Him  under 
the  figure  of  Buddha  or  the  "  oiled  and  curled  Assyrian 
Bull."  Science  is  slowly  but  firmly  escorting  that 
simulacrum  of  a  divinity  to  the  frontiers  of  the  uni- 
verse. God  is  not  the  mighty  ruler  sitting  upon  a  re- 
^^  mote  throne  outside  nature,  making  incalculable  in- 
^y  cursions  from  thence  within  its  realms,  and  retiring 
again  to  the  high  seat.  We  do  not  ask  who  shall  as- 
cend into  heaven  and  bring  Him  down,  or  who  shall 
descend  into  the  abyss  to  bring  Him  up.  For  we  know 
that  He  is  most  nigh.  "  Closer  is  He  than  breathing, 
and  nearer  than  hands  or  feet."  Shall  we  thrust  Him 
farther  away  in  order  that  we  may  distinguish  His  out- 
lines more  closely  ?  Shall  we  not  rather  go  on  serenely, 
unmindful  of  the  scorn  of  those  who  so  adore  definite- 
ness  of  doctrine  that  they  will  worship  no  God  that 
cannot  be  i\^^x\(^A  9 

"Oh  where  is  the  sea,"  the  fishes  cried? 

As  they  swam  the  crystal  clearness  through  ; 
"  We've  heard  from  of  old  of  the  ocean's  tide, 

And  we  long  to  look  on  the  waters  blue. 
The  wise  ones  speak  of  an  infinite  sea. 

Oh  who  ciin  tell  us  if  such  there  be?  " 

The  lark  flew  up  in  the  morning  bright. 
And  sung  and  balanced  on  sunny  wings  ; 

And  this  was  its  song  ;   "1  sec  the  light  ; 
I  look  on  a  world  of  beautiful  things  ; 

But  flying  and  singing  everywhere 
In  vain  I  searched  to  find  the  air." 


THE  NEW  SITUATION 


THE  NEW   SITUATION 

We  are  confronted  with  a  situation.  Practically 
all  under  forty  years  of  age  have  been  educated  under 
the  domination  of  the  E'ew  Learning.  Their  teachers 
and  their  text-books  have  been  for  the  most  part  silent 
concerning  religious  belief.  When  they  have  not  been 
silent  they  have  been  Agnostic.  The  newspapers, 
magazines,  periodicals  which  they  read  give  but  little 
space  to  the  discussions  of  religious  problems.  When 
they  do  deal  with  these  it  is  usually  to  point  out  some 
alleged  incompatibility  of  religion  and  science,  or  to 
harmonize  some  such  antagonism.  So  it  has  come 
about  that  this  is  characterized  as  an  "  Age  of  Doubt." 
It  would  be  more  accurate  to  characterize  it  as  an  age 
of  uncertainty,  hesitation,  perplexity.  For  doubt  in 
the  realm  of  religion  usually  carries  a  connotation  of 
antagonism.  That  is  not  the  mark  of  the  doubt  of  to- 
day. It  is  not  so  much  doubt  as  doubtfulness.  The 
steadily  deepening  moral  earnestness  has  brought  mul- 
titudes to  be  at  once  more  willing  and  less  able  to  re- 
tain many  things  "  which  have  been  most  steadfastly 
believed  amongst  us."  Take  them  altogether,  people 
were  never  so  well  disposed  to  believe  the  truths  of 
Christianity,  and  never  so  perplexed  as  to  precisely 

171 


172  THE   NEW   SITUATION 

what  those  truths  are.  There  is  a  widespread  distaste 
for  what  is  called  dogma.  Doctrinal  sermons  are  lis- 
tened to  with  impatience,  if  hearkened  to  at  all.  Doc- 
trinal treatises  have  no  charm  for  the  multitude. 
Time  was  when  they  had.  When  one  looks  over  faded 
pamphlets  which  preserve  the  sermons  to  which  mul- 
titudes of  people  eagerly  listened  half  a  century  ago, 
his  wonder  is  not  at  their  inconclusiveness,  but  their 
dullness.  But  they  did  not  seem  dull  then.  Why  do 
they  now  ? 

Rightly  or  wrongly,  the  impression  is  abroad  that 
Christ  has  been  lost  in  Christianity.  The  person  has 
been  hidden  by  the  theology.  The  truth  has  been  over- 
laid and  obscured  by  the  creeds.  The  cry  of  the 
time  is  "  Back  to  Christ."  The  titles  of  the  books 
which  serious-minded  persons  are  reading  are  but  vari- 
ations upon  this  theme.  But  who  is  this  Jesus  ?  What 
does  He  stand  for  ?  What  does  His  life  signify  ?  The 
reply  to  these  questions  must  needs  constitute  a  creed. 
Why  then  not  take  the  dogmas  which  have  been  so  la- 
boriously constructed  by  the  Church  in  the  ages  past, 
press  them  upon  the  people,  fortify  them  by  argument, 
defend  them  against  opposition,  prove  them  by  Scrip- 
ture, and  so  bring  men  to  belief  ?  I  reply,  because  the 
thing  is  impossible.  It  is  true  that  many  think  it  is 
possible.  They  would  reply  to  questions  by  more 
strenuous  assertion.  "  Dogma  the  Antidote  for  Doubt," 
is  the  happy  title  of  a  treatise  by  a  venerable  bishop 
who  may  be  taken  as  the  representative  of  those  who 


THE  NEW   SITUATION  173 

are  of  his  way  of  thinking.  But  the  world's  reply, 
while  in  its  present  mood,  is  in  the  words  of  Henry 
"Ward  Beecher,  "  Dogma  is  the  skin  of  truth  stuffed 
and  set  up  in  a  museum." 

The  time  is  certainly  fitting  for  the  modest  attempt 
here  made,  that  is,  to  disentangle  those  beliefs  which 
are  fundamental  and  essential  from  those  which  are 
secondary,  incidental  or  paltry.  The  everyday  man 
stands  appalled  and  disheartened  at  what  he  has  come 
to  think  the  complexity  of  the  articles  of  the  Christian 
Faith.  He  is  urged  to  believe,  but  then  he  is  urged  to 
believe  so  many  things  that  he  hesitates,  not  so  much 
at  their  diflQculty  as  at  their  mass.  A  few  years  ago 
that  monster  of  learning,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Schaff,  essayed 
the  task  of  gathering  together  and  printing  "  The 
Creeds  of  Christendom."  Three  great  octavo  volumes 
of  nearly  a  thousand  pages  each  were  the  result  of  the 
attempt.  Many  of  them  are  now  unintelligible.  Still 
more  are  obsolete.  But  the  impression  left  upon  the 
mind  of  the  average  man  who  sees  the  work  is  that 
Christian  truth  is  an  enormously  complex  and  difficult 
thing.  When  he  observes  farther  that  each  Confession 
of  Faith  is  repudiated  by  the  adherents  of  all  the  other 
confessions,  he  is  led  to  ask  in  the  temper  of  Pilate 
"What  is  Truth?"  Now  if  such  a  man  could  be 
brought  to  see  that  these  highly  elaborated  systems 
are  but  the  personal  opinions  of  individuals  at  differ- 
ent times  throughout  the  Christian  centuries,  and  that 
they  are  of  no  obligation  except  such  as  their  intrinsic 


174  THE   NEW   SITUATIOT^ 

reasonableness  may  carry,  he  will  feel  a  great  sense 
of  relief.  Mr.  Huxley  very  properly  resented  an  ex- 
pression used  by  Principal  Wace  in  a  controversy  with 
him.  "  The  word  infidel,  perhaps,  carries  an  unpleas- 
ant significance.  Perhaps  it  is  right  that  it  should. 
It  is  and  ought  to  be  an  unpleasant  thing  for  a  man  to 
have  to  say  plainly  that  he  does  not  believe." 

Fair-minded  men  will  side  with  Mr.  Huxley. 
Whether  belief  should  have  praise,  or  disbelief  odium, 
depends  altogether  upon  what  the  thing  is  for  which 
belief  is  asked.  Most  men  to-day  are  believers,  un- 
believers, doubters  and  seekers,  all  at  once.  They 
have  a  right  to  ask  of  the  Christian  Church, — What, 
precisely,  are  the  things  for  which  you  ask  credence  ? 
and,  HoAv  far  is  membership  in  your  society  dependent 
upon  assent  to  those  things  ? 

What  has  Church  membership  to  do  with  belief  in 
doctrine  ?  It  is  right  to  say  at  this  point  that  I  approach 
this  question  from  the  point  of  view  and  with  the  pre- 
possessions of  a  member  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church,  or  as  we  prefer  to  think  of  it,  the  Anglo- 
Catholic  Church.  The  general  attitude  of  this  Church 
toward  Doctrine  is  one  which  is  a  puzzle  to  multitudes 
outside,  and  often  little  understood,  even  by  her  own 
members.  The  contribution  which  this  Church  has 
to  make  toward  clearing  up  the  religious  perplexities 
of  the  time  is  not  any  neat,  coherent,  l)undle  of 
dogmas,  but  a  practical  method  of  dealing  with 
dogmas.     This  is  really  the  feature  of  that  Church 


THE   NEW    SITUATIOISr  1T5 

which  ought  to  arrest  attention.  For  instance,  she 
includes  in  her  membership  and  in  Iier  Ministry  tliose 
who,  so  far  as  doctrine  is  concerned,  are  Calvinists  and 
Armenians,  believers  in  tlie  Real  presence  and  Zwing- 
lians,  believers  in  the  Verbal  Inspiration  and  those 
who  regard  the  Bible  as  literature,  believers  in  Eternal 
punishment,  and  Universalists,  Evolutionists  and 
special  Creationists.  All  these,  and  men  with  all  sorts 
and  shades  of  prepossessions  and  beliefs,  dwell  to- 
gether in  the  same  ecclesiastical  society  and  with 
rare  exceptions,  no  one  ever  thinks  of  questioning  an- 
other man's  right  of  citizenship.  This  practical 
policy  is  the  rational  outcome  of  her  fundamental 
conception  of  what  the  Church  of  Christ  is.  She  be- 
lieves it  to  be,  like  the  State,  an  ordinance  of  God  for 
all  men.  The  condition  of  membership  in  it  must 
therefore  be  easy  and  simple.  It  is  meant  to  be 
Christ's  Institute  of  Righteousness.  It  must  be 
easily  accessible  to  sinners — intellectual  as  well  as 
moral  sinners.  Any  condition  of  membership  which 
she  might  make  would  be  null  and  void  in  so  far  as 
they  go  beyond  the  conditions  which  the  Master  has 
laid  down.  It  is  only  on  this  ground  that  member- 
ship in  the  Church  can  be  pressed  on  any  one  as  a  duty. 
The  policy  of  the  Roman  Church  is,  as  we  believe, 
indefensible,  because  she  urges  Church  membership  as 
a  duty,  while  she  at  the  same  time  erects  conditions 
which  are  intellectually  intolerable.  Protestantism, 
on  the  other  hand,  has  multiplied  the  doctrinal  condi- 


176  THE   NEW   SITUATION 

tions  precedent  so  enormously,  that  it  has  practically 
ceased  to  insist  upon  Church  membership  as  a  duty, 
and  only  offers  it  as  a  privilege  to  a  select  few.  That 
this  is  the  situation  is  easily  discovered.  Let  a 
stranger  who  is  willing  and  anxious  to  cooperate  with 
the  Christian  Society  and  to  join  in  her  Sacraments, 
but  who  says  frankly  that  he  does  not  believe  in  the 
dogmas  of  Papal  Infallibility,  or  the  Immaculate 
Conception,  ask  for  Confirmation  at  the  hands  of 
a  Koman  Bishop,  and  see  whether  or  not  he  will  be 
received  ?  Let  the  same  man  apply  for  membership 
in  a  Protestant  Church,  saying  at  the  same  time  that 
he  does  not  believe  in  the  Inspiration  of  the  Bible,  or 
generally  in  the  particular  Confession  of  Faith  about 
which  that  denomination  is  organized,  and  see  whether 
he  will  be  admitted  ?  It  is  not  at  all  to  the  point  to 
inquire  whether  these  doctrines  alluded  to  are  true  or 
untrue.  The  point  is  that  a  Church  is  acting  ultra 
vires  when  it  makes  any  such  beliefs  a  condition  of 
membership,  or  of  admission  to  its  Ministry.  Any 
one  who  is  a  disciple  of  Christ  has  a  right  to  mem- 
bership in  His  Church.  However  feeble  his  belief, 
however  erroneously  he  may  conceive  of  Christ's 
power,  however  he  may  stand  in  need  of  instruction 
and  development,  he  has  a  right  to  membership  in  the 
Society.  He  is  not  called  upon  to  seek  it  as  a  favor. 
He  stands  to  the  Church  as  he  does  to  the  State.  One's 
political  opinions  may  be  ever  so  wrong,  or  ever  so  op- 
posed to  those  generally  held  b}^  the  people  of  his  own 


THE   NEW   SITUATION"  177 

country,  but  lie  may  not  be  outlawed  for  opinions. 
He  can  only  be  refused  citizenship  or  be  disfranchised 
for  conduct. 

This  is  the  view  of  the  Church,  practically,  though 
not  very  consistently  acted  upon  by  the  Anglo-Cath- 
olic  Church.  It  is  greatly  to  be  desired  that  the 
"  Club  "  idea  of  the  Church  should  be  dislodged  from 
the  popular  mind.  "  What  must  I  'believe  if  I  join 
your  Church  ?  "  is  the  way  the  ordinary  man  speaks. 
"  If  he  don't  believe  what  his  Church  holds  he  ought 
to  get  out  of  it,"  is  the  way  the  newspaper  expresses 
the  popular  notion.  But  apply  the  same  theory  to 
citizenship  in  the  State,  and  one  sees  its  absurdity.  If 
the  Church  be  a  divine  institute  in  which  membership 
is  obligatory  upon  every  disciple  of  Christ,  then  no 
conditions  can  be  made,  or  should  be  regarded  if  made, 
save  those  which  He  Himself  laid  down.  The  unpar- 
donable offence  of  dogma  is  when  it  thrusts  itself  into 
a  place  of  authority  to  which  it  has  no  title.  The 
question  is  not  concerning  its  truth  or  falsity,  but  its 
function.  This  Church  repudiates  the  claim  of  author- 
ity for  all  dogmatic  statements  which  go  beyond  the 
range  of  recognized  facts.  The  facts  upon  which 
Christianity  is  based  she  believes  to  be  real  facts,  and 
its  phenomena  real  phenomena,  but  the  relation  of 
these  to  each  other  and  to  the  new  truth  constantly 
being  uncovered,  are  open  to  be  constantly  re-stated 
in  the  language  of  successive  generations.  When  tra- 
ditional statements  cease  to  be  intelligible  they  be- 


178  THE   NEW    SITUATION 

come  to  all  practical  concern,  false.  If  they  be  still 
insisted  upon  they  become  stumbling  stones  and  rocks 
of  offence.  It  is  distressingly  apparent  that  this  has 
come  to  be  the  fact. 

"  The  religious  world  is  given  to  a  strange  delusion. 
It  fondly  imagines  that  it  possesses  a  monopoly  of 
serious  and  constant  reflection  upon  the  terrible  prob- 
lems of  existence  ;  and  that  those  who  cannot  accept  its 
shibboleths  are  either  mere  Galios  caring  for  none  of 
these  things,  or  libertines  desiring  to  escape  from  the 
restraint  of  morality.  It  does  not  appear  to  have 
entered  the  imaginations  of  these  people  that  outside 
their  pale,  and  firmly  resolved  not  to  enter  it,  there 
are  thousands  of  men, — certainly  not  their  inferiors  in 
capacity,  character,  or  knowledge  of  the  questions  at 
issue, — who  estimate  the  purely  spiritual  elements  of 
the  Christian  faith  as  highly  as  they  do,  but  who  have 
nothing  to  do  with  the  Christian  Churches,  because  in 
their  profession  of  belief  on  the  evidence  offered, 
would  be  simply  immoral."  ^ 

It  is  not  wise  to  dismiss  this  as  a  railing  accusation 
brought  by  an  adversary.  It  is  a  mere  statement  of 
fact  made  by  a  man  who  had  a  trick  of  knowing  facts 
when  he  saw  them.     Moreover,  what  he  says  is  true. 

"  I  certainly  believe  that  there  are  many  more  un- 
polished diamonds  hidden  in  the  churchless  mass  of 
humanity  than  the  church-going  part  of  the  com- 
munity has  any  idea  of.  I  am  even  disposed  to  think 
•Huxley  :    Science  and  Christian  Tradition,  Appletou,  p.  140. 


THE   NEW   SITUATION  179 

that  a  great  and  steadily  increasing  portion  of  the 
moral  worth  of  society  lies  outside  of  the  Church, 
separated  from  it  not  by  Godlessness,  but  rather  by 
exceptionally  intense  moral  earnestness.  Many,  in 
fact,  have  left  the  Church  in  order  to  be  Christians." 

It  may  be  well  at  this  point  to  call  attention  to 
what  we  mean  by  belief.  The  formula  is,  "  I  believe." 
We  do  not  say  "  I  know."  We  do  not  know.  Not  a 
few  are  needlessly  distressed  because  while  they  can 
demonstrate  the  reality  of  what  they  believe  in  other 
spheres,  they  cannot  altogether  state  the  ground  of 
their  religious  beliefs,  or  convince  others  of  their  re- 
ality. It  is  one  thing  for  one  to  be  able  to  give  a 
reason  for  the  hope  which  is  in  him,  and  quite  a  dif- 
ferent thing  to  make  another  man  believe  the  same 
thing.  The  best  that  one  can  attain  to  in  this  region 
is  the  possession  of  "  a  reasonable,  religious  and  holy 
hope."  If  a  man  can  but  justify  to  himself  the  es- 
sential reasonableness  of  his  beliefs,  it  is  enough.  But 
this  justification  is  reached  only  to  a  very  limited  ex- 
tent through  processes  of  logic.  Emotion,  affection, 
experience,  are  quite  as  potent,  and  quite  as  legit- 
imate agents  as  reason.  Doctrine  is  nothing  more 
than  the  attempt  to  express  belief  in  terms  of  the  un- 
derstanding. 

That  is  the  reason  of  the  adoption  of  the  method 
which  I  have  determined  to  follow.  The  attempt 
has  often  been  made  to  take  the  articles  of  the  Cath- 
olic Creed  one  by  one  and  establish  them  in  the  court 


180  THE   NEW   SITUATION 

of  reason.  Classical  instances  of  tliis  sort  are  such  as 
"  Pearson,  on  the  Creed,"  and  "  Liddon,  on  the  Di- 
vinit}^  of  Jesus  Christ."  Such  arguments  have  a  place 
and  use.  They  clarify  and  fortify  belief  in  those 
where  it  is  already  present.  But  it  is  to  be  greatl}^ 
doubted  whether  they  have  ever  produced  belief 
where  it  is  lacking.  What  I  seek  is  at  once  more  mod- 
est and  more  difficult.  I  would  induce  belief  in  those 
who  are  hesitating,  doubtful,  perplexed,  and  unable 
to  believe.  To  do  this  one  must  commence  with  an 
appeal  to  those  realities  wliich  come  within  the 
everyday  experience  of  the  everyday  man.  If  these 
experiences,  when  drawn  out  into  consciousness  and 
formulated  in  intelligible  propositions,  should  show 
even  a  likeness  to  the  statements  of  the  Catholic 
Creeds,  it  will  be  just  so  much  gain  to  the  Truth 
and  to  the  Church. 


NATURE  AND  GOD 


XI 

NATUEE   AND   GOD 

To  what  then  are  we  as  Christians  and  as  Church- 
men committed  ?  I  reply,  in  general,  we  are  com- 
mitted to  a  belief  in  the  reality  of  religious  phe- 
nomena. That  is  to  say,  we  believe  that  the  facts 
and  forces  which  we  talk  about  and  claim  to  deal 
with  in  our  religious  life,  are  real  facts  and  real 
forces,  that  they  are  not  mere  sentiments  or  ideas  to 
which  no  objective  facts  correspond.  We  hold  them 
to  be  something  far  more  than  creations  of  fear  and 
figments  of  fancy,  or  formless  clouds  of  emotion. 
When  we  speak  such  words  as  "  God,"  "  Duty," 
"  Eevelation,"  "  Providence,"  "  Immortality,"  "  Eter- 
nal Life,"  we  believe  that  we  are  handling  real  things 
and  not  imaginary  things.  This  is  really  the  point 
at  which  the  religious  man  and  the  non-religious  man 
diverge.  The  latter  shuts  himself  within  what  he 
calls  "Nature,"  while  the  former  claims  both  the 
right  and  the  power  to  step  outside  this  circle  and  to 
move  in  a  region  which  he  still  calls  natural,  but 
which  the  non-religious  man  calls  "  supernatural."  It 
ought  to  be  said  in  passing  that  this  antithesis  of 
natural  and  supernatural  is,  strictly  speaking,  illegit- 
imate.    The  actual  antithesis  is  between  the  real  and 

183 


184  NATURE   AND   GOD 

the  unreal.  Whatever  is  is  natural.  In  the  plane  where 
it  has  its  existence  its  very  being  vindicates  its  natu- 
ralness. The  fundamental  question  about  that  whole 
set  of  phenomena  which  are  called  supernatural  is  not 
"  Do  they  exist  outside  of  ^Nature  ?  "  but  "  Do  they 
exist  at  all  ?  "     This  is  the  crux. 

There  are  two  ways  at  present  current  of  thinking 
about  the  universe  :  One  of  them  is  the  way  which 
is  familiar  to  religion,  and  the  other  to  science.  Per- 
haps the  scientific  way  will  be  called  to  mind  more 
vividly  by  a  simple  mention  of  a  few  of  its  repre- 
sentative names  than  by  an  attempt  to  define  it. 
There  are  two  or  three  such  names  which  have  been 
heard  now  for  nearly  a  generation  from  the  pulpit, 
and  in  the  religious  press,  and  in  all  discussions  about 
religion,  until  their  very  mention  may  provoke  a 
smile.  The  reason  why  the  names  of  Huxley,  and 
Tyndal,  and  Spencer  have  been  so  frequently  used  is 
not  so  much  on  account  of  what  the  intrinsic  force  of 
what  they  have  said  or  written,  but  rather  because 
they  stand  as  convenient  symbols  to  represent  a  way 
of  looking  at  things.  This  way  Mr.  Balfour  has  called 
"  Naturalism." 

That  general  conception  of  the  universe  is,  roughly, 
that  actual  existence  ends  with  those  things,  facts,  and 
forces  which  either  come  within  the  perception  of  the 
senses,  or  can  be  logically  derived  therefrom.  Nat- 
uralism takes  its  stand  in  the  centre  of  a  wide  circle. 
That  circle  includes  within  it  Nature,  to  the  utmost 


NATURE   AND   GOD  185 

conceivable  limit  of  space.     Within  that  ring  it  con- 
ceives to  be  at  work  a  complex  machinery  of  matter 
and   force.     Whether   there  be  any  existence  within 
this  circle  which  science  cannot  deal  with,  it  does  not 
pretend  to  say.     What  it  alleges  is  that  when  men 
keep  to  the  field  of  Nature  their  feet  are  upon  the 
ground  and  they  move  with  a  sense  of  security.     It 
approves  of  the  dictum  of  Kant  that  existence  is  an 
island,  shut  up  within  Nature  as  in  intangible  bar- 
riers.    It  is  the  country  of  truth,  but  it  is  surrounded 
by  a  broad  and  stormy  ocean,  the  proper  place  of  illu- 
sion, where  many  a  fog  bank,  and  many  an  ice-berg 
give  false  promise  of  new  countries,  incessantly  de- 
ceiving mariners,  who  are  ambitious  of  new  discovery, 
with  mighty  hopes,  and  involving  them  in  adventures 
which   can   never  be  abandoned,  and  yet  which  can 
never  be  concluded.     This  naturalistic  w^ay  of  regard- 
ing existence  has  come  to  be  very  common.     Within 
a  generation  the  frontiers  of  nature  have  been  almost 
immeasurably     extended.       Places     where    mystery 
lurked  once,  have  now  been  illuminated  by  the  search- 
light of  science.     The  result  has  been  to  create  what 
may  be  called  credulity  as  toward  the  natural,  and 
skepticism  as  toward  the  supernatural.     It  is  more  a 
temper  or  disposition  of  mind  in  the  communit}'-  than 
an  intelligent  or  reasoned  conviction.     Nevertheless, 
it   exists,    and   indeed,    is   the  outstanding  fact  with 
which   the   religious   man    has  to  deal.     It  is  by  no 
means   confined  to   scholars  or  scientific  men.     The 


186  NATURE   AND   GOD 

business  man,  the  professional  man,  the  mechanic,  are 
all  alike  under  its  influence.  They  say,  "  When  we 
are  dealing  with  the  things  of  Nature  we  feel  sure 
about  them  ;  when  we  are  asked  to  consider  the  things 
of  another  world,  we  are  unable  to  think  or  act  with 
certitude." 

We  who  are  Christians  feel  the  force  of  this  very 
keenly.  We,  too,  are  under  the  influences  of  the 
spirit  of  the  Age.  I^evertheless,  we  have  convictions 
concerning  the  unseen  things  which  are  quite  as  deep 
and  real,  and  affect  our  practical  conduct  as  much  as 
do  our  beliefs  in  the  reality  of  the  things  which  we 
touch,  and  taste,  and  handle.  How  then,  shall  the 
Christian  believer  who  is  not  a  fanatic  or  dreamer,  or 
idealist,  justify, — not  alone  to  the  world  about  him, 
but  to  himself, — the  existence  of  his  faith  ?  We  be- 
lieve in  existence  in  two  planes.  We  believe  that  they 
are  both  equally  natural.  We  have  in  mind  that  they 
are  apprehended  by  different  methods  and  that  they 
operate  in  different  ways,  but  we  insist  upon  their 
actual  existence.  How  shall  we  adjust  our  religious 
belief  to  our  scientific  creed  ? 

Several  methods  have  been  tried  with  very  unsatis- 
factory results.     One  of  them  is  to  apportion  existence 
into  two  provinces  over  one  of  which  Reason  rules 
and  over  the  other  Faith.     Says  Mr.  Balfour : 

"  This  method  consists  in  setting  up  side  by  side 
with  the  creed  of  natural  science,  another  and  supple- 
mentary set  of  beliefs  which  minister  to  the  needs  and 


NATURE   AND   GOD  187 

aspirations  which  science  cannot  meet,  and  Avhich  may 
speak  amid  silence  which  science  is  powerless  to 
break.  The  natural  Avorld  and  the  spiritual  world  are 
in  this  view  each  of  them  real,  and  each  of  them  ob- 
jects of  real  knowledge.  But  the  laws  of  the  natural 
world  are  revealed  to  us  by  the  discoveries  of  science, 
while  the  laws  of  the  spiritual  world  are  revealed 
through  the  authority  of  inspired  witnesses,  or  di- 
vinely guided  institutions.  The  two  regions  of  knowl- 
edge lie  side  by  side,  and  contiguous,  but  not  con- 
nected, like  empires  of  different  races  and  language, 
which  own  no  common  jurisdiction,  nor  hold  any  in- 
tercourse with  each  other,  except  along  a  disputed  and 
wavering  frontier." 

This  method  has  attractions  for  very  many,  but  is 
not  Avithout  the  gravest  practical  difficulties.  It  calls 
upon.  Keason  to  deal  with  natural  facts  and  upon 
Faith  to  deal  with  spiritual  facts.  It  sets  these  two 
powers  of  the  soul  over  against  each  other.  It  pro- 
poses to  parcel  out  the  universe  between  them.  It  re- 
sents as  an  intrusion  the  entrance  of  either  one  of 
these  faculties  into  the  domain  of  the  other.  It  thinks 
that  for  this  world  the  wisest  mode  of  procedure  is  to 
open  one's  eyes  and  keep  one's  mouth  shut,  while  the 
proper  attitude  toward  the  facts  of  the  other  world  is 
to  shut  one's  eyes  and  open  one's  mouth  and  swallow 
whatever  faith  may  place  within  it.  The  trouble  with 
this  scheme  is  that  human  nature  is  all  of  one  piece. 
Reason  and  Faith  are  not  two  separate  faculties  like 
hearing  and  seeing,  taking  cognizance  of  different 
class  of  phenomena.  Each  one  of  them  is  the  action 
of  the  whole  personality.     If  the  religious  faculty  be 


188  NATURE   AND   GOD 

nothing  better  than  credulity  plus  hysterics,  its  de- 
liverance \yill  neither  be  responsible  nor  respected. 
All  that  any  man  really  believes  must  be  capable 
of  being  brought  into  some  unity.  The  human 
soul  must  always  experience  a  feeling  of  distress 
at  any  attempt  to  create  within  it  a  perpetual  schism. 
Naturalism  and  orthodoxy  are  alike  ill-advised  when 
they  insist  upon  this  division  of  territory.  What  we 
call  faith  cannot  be  done  without  by  a  scientific  in- 
vestigator. What  we  call  science  cannot  be  done 
without  by  a  believer.  As  Mr.  Balfour  again  says 
"there  are  many  persons,  and  they  are  increasing  in 
number,  who  find  it  difficult  or  impossible  to  acquiesce 
in  this  division  of  the  '  Whole '  of  knowledge  into  two 
or  more  unconnected  fragments.  Naturalism  may  be 
practically  unsatisfactory,  but  at  least  the  positive 
teaching  of  Naturalism  has  secured  general  assent, 
and  it  shakes  every  instinct  for  unity  to  be  asked  to 
patch  and  plaster  this  accepted  creed  with  a  number 
of  propositions  drawn  from  an  entirely  different  source 
and  on  behalf  of  which  no  such  common  agreement 
can  be  claimed." 

Nor  has  Professor  Drummond's  effort  to  confuse 
the  natural  and  the  spiritual  worlds  been  more  satis- 
factory. At  first  sight  one  is  likely  to  be  taken 
by  the  brilliancy  of  his  argument.  A  more  careful 
reading,  however,  usually  leaves  upon  one  the  impres- 
sion that  he  has  reached  liis  conclusions  by  means  of 
the  ambiguity  of  his  definitions. 


NATURE    AND    GOD  189 

Here  then  is  the  situation :  We  move  within  the 
ring  of  naturalism.  Its  diameter  has  been  enormously 
extended.  In  space  its  frontier  has  passed  out  of  view 
beyond  where  old  Bootes  leads  his  leash  or  Sagit- 
tarius draws  his  bow  in  the  South.  In  depth  it  pene- 
trates below  the  deepest  discovery  of  microscopic  life. 
In  height  it  overarches  and  essays  to  include  within 
it  the  moral  sense  of  man.  But  at  every  point  where 
one  approaches  it  with  the  desire  to  escape  its  bound- 
aries, he  finds  himself  confronted  with  the  legend 
"No  thoroughfare." 

Is  there  any  divine  voice?  Is  mere  interpenetrat- 
ing it  any  divine  energy  ?  How  shall  one  pass  from 
the  things  which  are  seen  to  the  things  which  are  un- 
seen ?  As  we  have  observed,  one  cannot  send  Faith 
out  in  quest  of  discoveries  while  Reason  stays  at  home 
and  manages  the  affairs  of  the  household.  Where 
then  shall  we  seek  for  the  path  of  exit  from  ISTature 
and  of  entrance  into  Religion  ?  It  Avould  seem  to  be 
plain  enough  that  if  any  such  gate  is  discoverable  it 
must  be  one  which  can  be  discerned  from  the  side  of 
Nature. 

Of  course  there  is  a  conception  of  divine  revelation 
which  is  not  disturbed  by  the  present  situation.  It 
thinks  of  God  as  coming  from  the  outside,  of  His  own 
motion,  and  by  arbitrary  methods,  breaking  into 
the  territory  of  the  natural  for  the  purpose  of  pro- 
claiming His  truth.  The  part  of  humanity  has  been 
and    is    to   sit   still   and    wait.     God    will   rend    the 


190  NATUEE   AND   GOD 

heavens  and  come  down.  Men  have  but  to  hearken 
and  do.  This  conception  is  eminently  simple,  but  un- 
fortunately the  facts  of  nature  and  of  revelation  are 
against  it.  God  has  found  men  only  when  men  have 
sought  God,  Revelation  and  discovery  are  reverse 
and  obverse.  If  God  is  to  reveal  Himself  He  must  be 
sought  for.  But  where  ?  And  how  ?  Along  what 
path  shall  one  travel,  and  what  shall  he  accept  as  his 
guide  ? 

The  consensus  of  the  religious  world  has  practically 
agreed  here.  The  wicket  gate  ^vhich  leads  out  into 
the  celestial  country  is  Conscience. 


EYOLUTIOK  AND  GOD 


XII 

EVOLUTION  AND   GOD 

Twenty  years  ago  my  attention  was  for  the  first 
time  seriously  engaged  with  the  doctrine  of  Evolu- 
tion. Up  to  that  time  I  had  thought  of  it,  in  a  gen- 
eral way,  as  being  a  proper  theme  for  jesting.  I  had 
contributed  my  poor  quota  of  jokes  upon  the  Dar- 
winians who  "  sought  their  ancestors  in  the  zoological 
garden  instead  of  the  Garden  of  Eden."  I  had 
thought  that  a  suflBcient  answer  to  the  Theory,  for 
practical  men,  was  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that 
monkeys  have  tails  and  men  do  not. 

But  the  rapid  spread  of  the  theory,  and  its  sober 
entertainment  by  men  of  whose  sanity,  at  any  rate,  I 
could  not  doubt,  led  me  to  look  at  it  more  seriously. 
For  several  years  thereafter,  I  devoted  what  time  I 
could  spare  from  the  duties  of  a  parish  priest  in  a 
country  cure  to  the  reading  of  every  available  book 
which  had  up  to  that  time  appeared  in  French  or 
English  bearing  with  any  directness  upon  the  subject. 
It  seemed  to  me  then,  as  it  seems  to  me  now,  that 
whether  true  or  false,  the  theory  must  have  the  closest 
possible  relation  to  my  religion. 

When  I  first  came  to  see  Avhat  the  theory  involved, 
it  seemed  incompatible  with  my  Christianity,  or,  in- 

193 


194  EVOLUTION   AND   GOD 

deed,  with  the  honest  possession  of  any  religious  faith 
whatever.  My  mind  revolted  against  it.  It  appeared 
to  me  to  be  one  of  those  strange  mental  crazes  which 
Bishop  Butler  thought  could  now  and  then  envelop  a 
generation  in  the  same  way  that  a  temporary  insanity 
sometimes  seizes  upon  an  individual.  The  theory 
seemed  to  me  to  be  unworthy  of  man  and  to  leave  no 
place  for  God.  It  was  apparently  without  sufficient 
proof  for  its  alleged  facts.  It  appeared  practically 
dangerous  to  persons  and  to  society  in  that  it  trans- 
ferred duty  to  a  new,  untried,  and  insecure  basis.  It 
seemed  to  dethrone  all  familiar  and  intrenched  au- 
thority for  conduct,  and  to  leave  those  who  sincerely 
accepted  it  free  from  the  sanctions  which  I  conceived 
to  be  necessary  to  insure  righteousness. 

Since  then,  like  most  intelligent  men  of  our  genera- 
tion, I  have  read  and  thought  much  upon  the  same 
theme.  Indeed,  it  would  be  impossible  for  any  one 
whose  life  brings  him  in  contact  with  the  movements 
of  thought,  to  be  untouched  by  that  idea  which  is 
now,  and  has  been  for  more  than  twenty  years,  the 
dominant  one. 

The  result  has  been  that  familiarity  insensibly  re- 
moved the  horror  which  its  strangeness  caused  me. 
Now,  I  have  come  to  accept  it  as  being  in  the  main 
true ;  and  I  have  found  that  it  does  not  produce  at  all 
the  effect  upon  my  religious  faitli  or  morals,  or  those 
of  others  who  receive  it,  which  I  apprehended.  Such 
a  reversal  of  judgment,  made  soberly  and  deliberately, 


EVOLUTION   AND   GOD  195 

is  something  which  a  man  must  justify  to  himself. 
From  a  somewliat  extensive  and  intimate  acquaint- 
ance among  clergymen,  I  have  found  that  the  number 
of  those  who  have  passed  through  a  similar  experi- 
ence is  very  large.  I  have,  therefore,  made  my  "  con- 
fession," because  I  know  that  in  the  main  I  speak  for 
many  besides  myself. 

I  do  not  stop  now  to  define  the  doctrine  of  Evolu- 
tion. Any  one  who  does  not  know  what  it  is  cannot 
be  told  in  the  compass  of  an  essay.  It  is  a  theory  of 
phenomenal  existence  deduced  from  the  observed 
facts  of  existence.  It  has  pushed  itself  forward  by 
force  of  its  sheer  reasonableness,  until  it  now  domi- 
nates every  department  of  secular  science.  I  do  not 
think  it  would  be  possible  to  find  a  single  person  who 
has  been  educated  in  the  physical  sciences  within  the 
last  twenty  years  Avho  is  not  an  Evolutionist.  Its 
scientific  opponents  died  a  royal  death  in  Professor 
Agassiz — but  they  are  dead.  It  has  in  a  generation 
rendered  obsolete  whole  libraries  of  apologetics. 
Bishop  Butler's  postulates  are  now  the  subject  matter 
of  "  The  New  Evidences."  It  has  produced  a  new 
Psychology,  a  new  moral  Philosoph}^  a  new  Anthro- 
pology, and  is  now  working  a  revolution  in  The- 
ology. 

It  cannot  be  otherwise.  "  Science "  and  "  Ke- 
ligion  "  cannot  be  kept  apart.  Human  nature  is  not 
constructed  with  bulkheads.  The  contents  of  one 
compartment   flow   into   and   color   the   contents   of 


196  EVOLUTION   AND   GOD 

every  other  one.  The  dreariest  of  all  failures  have 
been  the  attempts  to  "reconcile"  "Keligion"  and 
"  Science."  Truth  is  one  and  needs  no  mediator.  So 
much  as  I  may  possess  of  Religion  and  of  Science  are 
identical.  I  cannot  distinguish  between  them  even  in 
thought.  I  think  in  a  certain  direction  and  for  con- 
venience' sake  call  it  a  religious  act ;  I  move  in  an- 
other direction  and  call  the  action  moral;  and  in 
a  third  and  call  it  scientific.  In  very  truth  the 
terms  might  be  used  interchangeably.  If  my  religion 
be  honest  and  spontaneous,  it  has,  therefore,  a  scien- 
tific quality.  That  is  to  say,  it  is  a  procedure  which 
receives  the  sanction  of  my  whole  being,  and  justifies 
itself  in  the  same  scientific  way  as  does  the  truth  that 
two  and  two  make  four.  This  identity  is  so  complete 
that  everything  which  changes  or  modifies  my  con- 
ception of  the  material  universe  changes  also  my  con- 
ception of  the  spiritual  universe,  and  vice  versa.  As 
thoughts  of  the  two  emerge,  they  mingle  with  and 
color  one  anether  at  the  very  fountain-head  before 
they  flow  into  consciousness.  I  find,  therefore,  in  my- 
self, what  occidental  Christendom  is  finding  in  itself, 
that  the  contents  of  my  religious  belief  have  become 
penetrated  and  saturated  by  a  thought  of  the  material 
universe  which  came  to  me  later  in  time  than  did  the 
contents  of  my  faith. 

Theology  and  Anthropology  are  correlatives.  One's 
thought  of  what  God  is  is  dependent  upon  what  he 
thinks  man  and  the  universe  to  be.     If  either  side  be 


EVOLUTION   AND   GOD  197 

changed  Avithout  a  corresponding  modification  in  the 
other,  the  equation  is  thrown  out  of  balance,  and  one 
experiences  a  strange  sense  of  distress.  Such  a 
change  has  occurred  in  our  time. 

"Whence  and  how  came  the  things  which  we  see  ? 
The  heavens  and  the  earth  and  the  sea  ?  The  teem- 
ing life  of  plant  and  brute  and  man?  Most  of  us 
were  reared  to  think  of  them  as  the  cunning  work  of 
a  great  Artificer,  each  of  them  fast  set  in  that  order 
or  place  or  nature  in  which  it  was  placed  at  that  time 
a  few  thousand  years  ago  when.  "  Creation "  was 
ended.  We  unconsciously  thought  of  the  Creator  as 
independent  of  his  creation.  We  thought  of  creation 
as  complete.  Things  were,  as  to  their  essential  na- 
tures, such  as  they  had  been  at  the  beginning ;  and 
such  they  would  remain  until  the  great  Builder  should 
reappear  as  the  great  Destroyer.  We  have  found 
that  the  facts  are  not  thus.  The  universe  of  to-day  is 
not  that  of  yesterday,  the  universe  of  to-morrow  will 
not  be  that  of  to-day.  All  things  are  moving,  chang- 
ing, transforming  themselves.  When  Mr.  Darwin 
showed  that  in  the  animate  world  species  were  not 
fixed  and  final,  but  fluid  and  plastic,  he  destroyed  at 
a  stroke  the  old  conception  of  creation.  If  his  read- 
ing of  the  facts  be  true,  we  are  now  in  the  midst  of 
the  creative  process.  The  movement  which  we  see, 
and  of  which  we  are  a  part  is  not  different  in  kind 
from  that  "  creation "  which  we  had  fancied  ended 
long  ago.     The  meclianical  notion  of  the  universe  and 


198  EVOLUTION   AND   GOD 

of  God's  relation  to  it  is  rapidly  disappearing.  The 
terms  which  were  in  use  a  generation  ago  are  no 
longer  heard.  Doctor  Paley's  "  watch "  has  been 
laid  away.  People  no  longer  speak  of  "  mechanism  " 
and  "  adaptation "  and  "  design."  They  speak  of 
"  organism  "  and  "  development "  and  "  growth  "  and 
evolution.  The  way  of  thinking  about  nature  has 
changed. 

At  this  point  I  wish  to  say  that  I  am  intentionally 
avoiding  the  technical  terms  and  phrases  of  philoso- 
phy and  metaphysics.  My  purpose  is  to  set  forth  the 
changes  which  Evolution  has  caused  in  the  common 
thought  about  God  and  religion,  and  not  the  changes 
in  those  theories  with  which  philosophies  deal.  The 
two  things  are  not  the  same.  There  may  be  twenty 
theories  about  God,  held  by  different  philosophers  in. 
the  same  community,  at  the  same  time.  But  the 
community  itself  has  a  notion  of  its  own  which  may 
be  different  from  any  or  all  of  them. 

Western  Christendom,  since  Augustine's  time,  has 
had  its  own  notions  about  God  and  Nature,  both  of 
which  notions  it  accepted  at  his  hands,  not  because 
they  were  true,  but  because  they  were  easily  present- 
able in  thought.  Its  theology,  its  anthropology,  and 
its  science  have  been  until  lately  adjusted  to  one  an- 
other. The  theory  of  evolution  has  destroyed  the 
adjustment.  The  current  notions  about  God  and  the 
new  thought  about  nature  cannot  get  on  together. 

According  to  the  average  man,  the  points  at  which 


EVOLUTION   AND   GOD  199 

God  and  nature  touch  each  other  are  Creation,  Eeve- 
lation,  Incarnation,  Miracles,  and  Judgment.  Besides 
this  there  is  a  shadowy  thought  of  a  Divine  superin- 
tendence of  affairs  called  Providence;  but  this  is 
usually  conceived  of  in  such  a  vague  and  contradic- 
tory way,  that  the  notion  will  not  yield  up  its  con- 
tents to  analysis.  Kow,  these  terms  do  not  connote 
the  same  things  to  an  Evolutionist  that  they  do  to  an 
immediate  Creationist.  I  have  already  quoted  Mr. 
John  Fiske's  confession  of  his  own  youthful  concep- 
tion of  God  as  a  celestial  timekeeper  noting  in  a  vol- 
ume all  a  boy's  deeds. 

I  am  quite  aware  that  it  may  be  said  that  the 
youthful  philosopher's  idea  of  God  was  a  better  and 
safer  one  than  the  one  for  which  he  exchanged  it  in 
his  mature  years.  I  will  not  quarrel  with  that.  It 
may  be  so,  conceivably.  But  I  wish  to  point  out  that 
the  child  of  an  Evolutionist,  belonging  to  a  generation, 
and  reared  in  a  community  where  the  new  thought  of 
nature  and  man  prevails,  could  no  more  present  to 
himself  thus  his  idea  of  God  than  he  could  present 
Him  under  the  figure  of  the  Buddha  or  Baal.  That 
way  of  thinking  which  we  term  evolution  has  changed 
all  this.  It  dominates  contemporary  literature.  It  has 
possession  of  the  centres  of  thought.  It  is  at  home  in 
the  university.  It  is  in  the  school-books  which  our 
children  use.  It  colors  popular  speech.  It  has  re- 
corded itself  permanently  in  the  structure  of  the 
human  mind.     The  notion  of  the  transcendental  God, 


200  EVOLUTION   AND   GOD 

the  great  Artificer,  the  great  Wonder-worker,  the 
great  Judge,  which  has  obtained  in  Western  Christen- 
dom for  fourteen  hundred  years,  can  no  longer  hold 
its  place.  Science  has  escorted  this  simulacrum  of  a 
Deity  to  the  frontiers  of  his  universe,  and,  with  many 
expressions  of  consideration,  give  him  his  conge. 

That  what  I  say  is  a  true  statement  of  the  situa- 
tion, I  bring  three  representative  witnesses  to  testify. 
First,  the  secularist  and  agnostic,  Mr.  Samuel  Laing : 

"  There  are  two  theories  of  the  universe  which  are 
in  direct  conflict :  the  one  that  it  was  created  and  is 
upheld  by  miracles — that  is,  by  a  succession  of  second- 
ary supernatural  interferences  by  a  Being  who  is  a 
magnified  man,  acting  from  motives  which,  however 
transcendental,  are  essentially  human  ;  the  other  that 
it  is  the  result  of  Evolution  acting  by  natural  laws  on 
a  basis  of  the  Unknowable.  Both  theories  cannot  be 
true." 

The  second  witness  is  Professor  Le  Conte,  the  de- 
vout Christian  and  distinguished  man  of  science  : 

"  If  the  sustentation  of  the  universe  by  the  law  of 
gravitation  does  not  disturb  our  belief  in  God  as  the 
sustainer  of  the  universe,  there  is  no  reason  why  the 
origin  of  the  universe  by  the  law  of  Evolution  should 
disturb  our  faith  in  God  as  the  Creator  of  the  uni- 
verse. .  .  .  But  it  is  evident  that  a  yielding  here 
implies  not  a  mere  shifting  of  line,  but  a  change  of 
base ;  not  a  readjustment  of  details,  but  a  reconstruc- 
tion of  Christian  theoloyy.     This,  I  believe,  is  indeed 


EVOLUTION    AND    GOD  201 

necessary.  From  the  point  of  view  of  Science  some 
very  fundamental  changes  in  traditional  views  are  al- 
ready plain.  Of  these  the  most  fundamental  are  our 
ideas  concerning  God,  Nature,  and  Man,  and  their  re- 
lations to  one  another." 

The  third  witness  is  that  group  of  English  clergy 
who  have  brought  their  testimonies  together  in  that 
volume  called  "  Lux  Mundi,"  under  the  editorship  of 
Dr.  Gore,  Principal  of  Pusey  House,  Oxford : 

"  God's  immanence  in  nature,  the  '  higher  panthe- 
ism,'  which  is  a  truth  essential  to  true  religion  as  it  is 
to  true  philosophy,  had  fallen  into  the  background. 
Slowly  but  surely  the  [opposite]  theory  of  the  world 
has  been  undermined.  The  one  absolutely  impossible 
conception  of  God  in  the  present  day  is  that  which 
represents  Him  as  an  occasional  visitor.  Science  has 
pushed  [that]  God  farther  and  farther  away,  and  at  the 
moment  when  it  seemed  as  if  He  would  be  thrust  out 
altogether,  Darwinism  appeared,  and  under  the  dis- 
guise of  a  foe  did  the  work  of  a  friend.  It  has  con- 
ferred upon  Pteligion  an  inestimable  benefit  by  show- 
ing us  that  we  must  choose  between  two  alternatives. 
Either  God  is  everywhere  present  in  nature  or  He  is 
nowhere.  We  must  return  to  the  Christian  view  of 
direct  Divine  agency,  the  immanence  of  Divine  power 
in  Nature  from  end  to  end,  or  we  must  banish  Him 
altogether.  It  seems  as  if  in  the  providence  of  God 
the  mission  of  modern  science  is  to  bring  home  to  us 
[this    conception   of    God].     We   are   not   surprised. 


202  EVOLUTION   AND   GOD 

therefore,  that  one  who,  like  Professor  Fiske,  holds 
that '  the  infinite  and  eternal  Power  that  is  manifested 
in  every  pulsation  of  the  universe  is  none  other  than 
the  living  God '  should  instinctively  feel  his  kinship 
with  Athanasius." 

How,  then,  will  the  Evolutionist  conceive  of  God 
and  His  relation  to  Nature  ?  I  reply  that,  in  the  first 
place,  his  notions  will  not  be  nearly  so  clearly  cut, 
sharply  defined,  and  easily  presentable  in  thought  as 
those  which  have  been  current.  It  will  be  charged 
against  them  that  they  are  vague,  elusive,  and  in 
places  contradictory.  And  the  charge  will  be  true. 
But  to  it  two  retorts  are  available.  First,  that  this  is 
true  also  of  Job  and  Isaiah,  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  John 
the  Divine  ;  and  the  second  is  that  it  may  be  better  to 
conceive  faultily  of  a  true  God  than  to  conceive  accu- 
rately of  a  false  one. 

The  Evolutionist  believes  that  he  sees  things  in  the 
very  act  of  becoming.  They  are  being  transformed 
before  his  very  eyes.  He  has  discovered  that  the 
physical  forces  which  he  sees  at  work  are  transmut- 
able,  and  are,  therefore,  one.  He  expects  that  the 
vital  and  psychical  forces  which  he  sees  to  be  also  at 
Avork  will  be  found  ultimately  to  be  identical  with 
them.  He  is  not  able  to  distinguish  between  "  nat- 
ural "  and  "  supernatural."  There  is  one  energy  and 
only  one.  It  manifests  itself  in  the  attraction  of 
gravitation ;  as  vital  force  it  holds  organized  matter 
together  in  living  things ;  it  "  wells  up  in  ourselves  in 


EVOLUTION   AND   GOD  203 

the  form  of  consciousness."  It  enfolds  and  interpene- 
trates them  all,  and  in  it  all  things  live  and  move  and 
have  their  coherence.  It  is  Wisdom^  for  it  is  the  sub- 
jective side  of  what  we  see  objectively  as  design ;  it  is 
Righteousness,  for  it  harmonizes  with  moral  conscious- 
ness ;  it  is  Goodness,  for  it  is  felt  whenever  the  sense 
of  sonship  is  awakened  with  its  attendant  affection. 

"  But,"  it  is  asked,  "  is  this  eternal,  all-embracing, 
all-penetrating  Energy  a  Person  f  Can  it  say  /  ?  " 
To  this  I  answer.  Yes  and  No.  If  men  would  stop 
for  a  moment  to  examine  what  they  mean  by  the  sort 
of  "personality"  which  they  usually  predicate  of 
God,  they  would  not  use  the  term  as  glibly  as  they 
often  do.  By  personality  they  mean  the  power  to 
distinguish  in  self-consciousness  between  the  subject 
who  thinks  and  other  existences  which  have  an  in- 
dependent subsistence.  That  idea  of  "  personality  " 
attributed  to  God  means  Dualism.  The  Evolutionist 
conceives  differently  of  God.  He  thinks  that  all 
things  are  one  in  Him.  When  He  thinks,  wills,  feels, 
the  whole  universe  is  involved  in  the  act  both  as  sub- 
ject and  object. 

The  human  brain  is  a  highly  organized  mass  of 
matter  in  a  certain  condition  called  living.  As- 
sociated with  it  is  thought,  will,  emotion.  The  two 
things  manifest  themselves  concomitantly.  As 
thought  is  to  the  human  brain,  so  is  God  to  the  uni- 
verse. Symmetrical  and  orderly  movement  in  the 
molecules  of  the  brain  is  at  once  the  sign  and  the  con- 


204:  EVOLUTION   AND   GOD 

sequence  of  thought.  The  devout  evolutionist  sees  in 
the  infinitely  complex  but  harmonious  movement  of 
the  universe  the  sign  of  the  indwelling  God.  He  can- 
not think  of  God  coming  into  the  universe  from  with- 
out to  create,  to  regulate,  to  deliver.  He  does  not 
ask,  Who  shall  ascend  into  heaven  to  bring  Him 
down?  for  he  knows  that  He  is  always  here.  He 
reverently  waits  and  watches  to  see  the  Divine  ideas 
express  themselves  in  terms  of  life  and  matter.  He 
believes  that  the  sum  total  of  things  as  it  exists  at 
any  one  moment  is  the  best  expression  of  God's 
thought  at  that  moment  possible;  but  that  it  must 
give  place  to  the  next  one  which  speaks  still  more 
perfectly.  He  does  not  sharply  distinguish  be- 
tween the  Revelation  which  is  accomplished  by  one 
means  and  that  accomplished  by  another,  calling  the 
one  Divine  and  the  other  Natural.  He  sees  develop- 
ment both  in  the  book  of  grace  and  the  book  of  na- 
ture. Both  of  them  uncover  God  "  multifariously  and 
fragmentarily  "  as  men  become  able  to  see.  He  waits 
with  confident  expectation  the  "  fullness  of  time  "  for 
the  Perfect  Man,  and  is  not  surprised  to  find  that  He 
and  God  are  one.  He  sees  a  Divine  quality  not  only 
in  all  perfect  things  completed,  but  in  the  slow  proc- 
esses by  which  they  reach  completeness.  He  is  not 
surprised  at  the  crude  religion  and  faulty  morals  of 
Patriarchs,  and  is  not  perplexed  in  the  presence  of 
goodness  in  the  pagan  world.  He  agrees  with  Justin 
Martyr,   as    quoted    approvingly    by    those    devout 


EVOLUTION   AND   GOD  205 

Evolutionists,  the  authors  of  "Lux  Mundi,"  that 
"those  who  lived  under  the  guidance  of  Eternal 
Keason,  as  Socrates,  Heracleitus,  and  such  like,  are 
Christians,  even  though  they  were  reckoned  to  be 
atheists  in  their  day."  He  does  not  believe  that  the 
"  Kingdom  of  Heaven  cometh  with  observation."  He 
does  not  think  it  true  to  say,  "  Lo,  here  is  Christ,  or 
lo,  there!"  He  believes  that  God  manifest  in  the 
flesh  has  taken  up  into  Himself  all  things ;  that  the 
whole  phenomenal  universe  together  and  in  its  myriad 
parts  is  moving,  changing,  transforming  itself,  and 
recombining,  not  blindly  and  without  a  goal,  but  by 
orderly  methods,  which  it  is  the  function  of  science  to 
discover  and  formulate,  toward  that  harmonious 
equilibrium  of  spiritual  and  natural  harmony  for 
which  no  phrase  stands  so  fittingly  as  that  of  the 
Master,  "The  Kingdom  of  God." 

Now,  I  am  painfully  alive  to  the  fact  that  this 
whole  way  of  thinking  and  speaking  seems  to  many 
to  be  vague,  elusive,  and  unsafe.  It  is  beyond  all 
comparison  easier  to  think  of  the  world  as  created  at 
a  definite  moment  of  time  so  many  centuries  ago,  by 
the  hand  of  a  God  who  appeared  out  of  the  immensity 
to  do  that  task ;  that  He  then  fashioned  cunningly  all 
living  things  in  genus  and  species  as  they  are  now ; 
that-manTBbeHcd  against-Him  at  oneerand-were-all 
abandoned  by^Hinr'toiiieH'^artey-^xe^yt  a  certain-  fam, 
whom  He  looked  down-upon  from  above- and  gathered 
out  from   their   feHowo  into  a   commonwealth  with 


206  EVOLUTION    AND   GOD 

which  alone  He  held  relations ;  that,  at  a  definite 
point  centuries  thereafter,  arbitrarily  chosen,  He  re- 
appeared to  select  other  some,  absolutely  a  great  mul- 
titude, whom  no  man  can  number,  but  relatively  an  in- 
significant number  from  the  teeming  myriads  of  men ; 
that,  with  these  exceptions,  a  rebellious  and  blighted 
\  world  is  abandoned  by  its  Maker  to  its  own  purpose- 
\  less  confusion,  waiting  for  its  end  to  be  accomplished 
in  one  dread  catastrophe. 

This  conception  of  God  and  the  world  is  simple, 
portable,  always  available  for  the  practical  needs  of  a 
teacher  or  exhorter,  easy  to  state  and  easy  to  receive. 
It  is  the  theology  of  the  Salvation  Army.  It  obtains 
commonly  among  Koman  Catholics  and  Methodists. 
It  is  what  newspaper  writers  have  vaguely  in  mind 
when  they  are  moved  to  deliver  themselves  on  ques- 
tions of  theology.  It  was  the  theology  hold  in  com- 
mon by  Jonathan  Edwards,  and  Luther,  and  the 
doctors  of  Trent,  and  Calvin,  and  Thomas  Aquinas, 
and  Augustine.  It  may  be  the  true  one ;  but  I  do  not 
think  so.  It  was  not  the  theology  of  that  sweet 
soul,  Pelagius,  or  Origen,  or  Justin  Martyr,  or 
Clement,  or  Paul,  or  John;  nor,  have  I  so  learned 
Christ. 

Says  the  Popula/r  Science  Monthly  :  "  Two  things 
are  evident,  first,  that  the  traditional  religion  has  lost 
its  hold  on  most  scientifically  educated  men  ;  and, 
second,  that  such  minds  will  not  be  content  without 
some  religion."     Such  are  the  great  mass  of  the  minds 


EVoi.rriON    AND  oon  '207 

with  whii'h   wo  have  to  do.     What    shall  wo  say  to 
lluMii  of  (iod  ? 

I^ish0}>  llunlini;IoM  Ihus  quaintly  says,  or  sings: 

"Tho  rarish  Tiiost 

Of  aust<Mi( y 
ClitnlHHl  up  a  liii^h  olnuvli  sleoplo, 

To  ln>  lu^uor  (ioil, 

So  (hat  he  luiijlit  hand 
His(  won!  down  to  His  ]>(HipU\ 

"  Ami  ill  siMinon  si'iipt 

H(>  thiilv  wroto 
\Vh:it  h<>  (hoii<;h(  was  soul  from  hoa\'On, 

Ami  ho  dropped  (his  down 

l)n  tlio  pooph^'s  hoads 
Two  (in\i\<(  oni>  day  in  sovon. 

"In  his  ajf(>  (lOd  s;»id: 

'(\)nu'  down  and  ilio; ' 
And  l\o  criod  on(  fi\Mn  {ho  stooplp, 

'  WluMV  ar(-  thou.  1  ,ord  ?  ' 

And  (lio  Lord  ivpliod, 
'  Pown  hoiv  among  my  people'  " 


GOD  MANIFESl 


XIII 

GOD    MANIFEST 

I  SUPPOSE  that  all  intelligent  men  do,  in  a  way,  be- 
lieve in  God.  It  is  difficult  to  see  how  phenomena 
can  be  thought  of  at  all  without  having  at  least  in  the 
background  of  one's  mind  the  consciousness  of  some 
sort  of  existence  which  is  not  phenomenal.  Avoiding 
the  language  of  metaphysics,  I  do  not  see  how  one  can 
observe  reasonableness  in  the  sequence  of  things  with- 
out tacitly  assuming  a  Eeason  which  lies  behind 
things,  and  who  is  in  some  way  the  cause  of  things. 
In  a  word,  and  speaking  for  myself  alone,  I  find  it  im- 
possible to  believe  in  a  heaven  and  an  earth  without 
believing  in  a  Creator  of  the  heavens  and  the  earth. 
I  know  that  some  men  are  capable  of  doing  so,  but  I 
am  not.  Of  course  I  do  not  conceive  of  Him  as  hav- 
ing completed  His  creation  at  some  time  in  the  past 
and  from  the  outside.  Creation  and  Providence  seem 
to  me  to  be  the  same  thing.  Or,  to  speak  more 
accurately.  Creation,  so  far  as  one  can  see  has  been  in 
progress,  and  is  in  progress,  and  will  be  eternally. 
Chance  and  progress,  integration  and  disintegration 
and  reintegration,  even  in  the  natural  universe  is 
"  eternal."  At  least  it  is  so  to  all  practical  purposes. 
For  the  phrase  "  eternal "  is  but  a  symbol,  like  the 

211 


212  GOD     MANIFEST 

Algebraic.  One  thinks  the  series  of  changes  back- 
ward or  forward  to  the  point  where  his  mind  falters 
and  stops.  What  lies  beyond  he  labels  with  the 
symbol  of  an  unknown  quantity  and  calls  it  "  eternal." 
No  two  men  mean  the  same  thing  by  the  word. 
Much  vain  disputation  would  have  been  saved  both  in 
Philosophy  and  Theology  if  men  had  always  borne 
this  simple  fact  in  mind.  They  have  wrangled  over 
the  questions  as  to  whether  matter  is  eternal,  or 
whether  future  reward  or  penalty  shall  be  eternal, 
forgetting  that  ex  vi  termini  they  have  not  been  able 
to  define  eternal. 

It  is  not  until  we  reach  this  point  that  my  dis- 
tinctively Christian  belief  begins.  So  far  I  only  be- 
lieve in  God  because  I  find  my  mind  so  constituted 
that  it  refuses  to  rest  upon  the  universe  as  a  finality. 

But  thus  far,  and  by  these  methods  we  have  not 
reached  the  Christian  God.  That  there  is  something 
behind  the  phenomena  which  we  see,  seems  to  be  an  al- 
most unanimous  conviction.  The  mind  refuses  to  rest 
upon  the  universe  as  a  finality.  I  cannot  think  of 
phenomena  without  passing  on  to  think  of  a  sub- 
stance, a  suh-stans  as  a  background  for  the  things 
which  are  seen.  I  think  it  must  be  intelligent  because 
I  shrink  from  the  thought  of  intellectual  confusion  at 
the  inmost  heart  of  things.  I  think  it  is  good,  partly 
because  I  see  that  evil  seems  to  have  within  it  a 
quality  which  tends  to  destroy  itself,  but  chiefly  be- 
cause the  most  imperative  and  categorical  of  all  my 


GOD    MANIFEST  213 

faculties  seem  to  declare  it,  I  "  ought "  is  what  I  owe. 
But  owe  to  what?  to  whom?  The  moral  sense  is 
the  rift  in  the  encircling  wall  of  Nature  through 
which  noble  souls  have  always  gone  out  in  confidence 
to  seek  God.  From  Isaiah  and  Epictetus  to  Carlyle 
and  Amiel  the  burden  of  the  prophet  and  the  faith  of 
the  righteous  man  has  always  been  that  there  is  "  a 
power,  not  ourselves,  which  makes  for  righteousness." 
But  is  this  the  last  w^ord  ? 

"  I  falter  where  I  firmly  trod, 

And  falling  with  my  weight  of  cares 
Upon  the  great  world's  altar-stairs 
That  slope  through  darkness  up  to  God, 

"  I  stretch  lame  hands  of  faith,  and  grope, 
And  gather  dust  and  chaff,  and  call 
To  what  I  blindly  feel  is  Lord  of  All, 
And  faintly  trust  the  larger  hope." 

Is  this  all  ?  Natural  science  and  secular  philosophy 
sadly  answer,  yes.  Thirty-six  years  ago  in  the  first 
volume  of  his  magnum  opus  their  fittest  spokesman 
declared,  "  The  Power  which  the  Universe  manifests 
to  us  is  utterly  inscrutable."*  The  same  depressing 
conclusion  is  reaffirmed  in  the  final  volume  issued  yes- 
terday.^ 

At  this  point  we  are  arrested  by  the  voice  of  Jesus 
Christ  offering  to  uncover  the  eternal  secret  of  God. 
"Why    should    we   heed   Him   rather   than   another  ? 

'  Herbert  Spencer  :  Forst  Principles. 
*  Synthetic  Philosophy,  Vol.  iii. 


214  GOD    MANIFEST 

This  is  the  parting  of  the  Avays.  Multitudes  of 
intelligent  men,  not  ignorant  of  the  course  of  human 
thought,  have  parted  company  with  their  scientific 
friends,  and  hearken  unto  Christ.  Two  men  are  in 
the  same  laboratory,  the  same  school,  the  same  business, 
equally  familiar  with  the  world's  knowledge.  The 
one  sees  in  Christ  the  fullness  of  the  Godhead  bodily. 
The  other  sees  in  Him  but  the  noblest  of  the  world's 
dreamers. 

But  why  should  I  heed  Jesus  Christ  rather  than  an- 
other man  upon  such  a  matter  ?  And  the  answer  I 
give  myself  is  something  like  this : 

I  believe  in  Jesus  Christ  to  begin  with,  because  He 
has  been  able  to  get  Himself  so  widely  believed  in.  I 
find  Him  to  be  at  this  moment  the  most  striking  per- 
sonality in  the  world.  More  men  do  actually  listen  to 
Him  when  He  speaks  about  God  than  to  any  other. 
He  has  held  ground  and  steadily  gained  ground 
through  so  many  centuries ;  His  teaching  has  evidently 
given  satisfaction  and  rest  to  so  many ;  and  among 
these  have  been  included  such  numbers  of  those  who 
bear  every  mark  of  seekers  after  the  truth,  that  I  must 
needs  join  myself  to  them,  at  least  to  listen.  I  lay 
emphasis  here  upon  the  distinctness  of  His  present 
personality.  I  am  not  concerned  yet  with  the  agencies 
by  which  I  am  introduced  to  Him.  The  record  of  His 
life  in  the  gospels  may  be  ever  so  inaccurate.  His 
early  disciples  may  have  misapprehended  Him  greatly. 
The  Church  may  be  built  around  a  caricature  of  His 


GOD    MANIFEST  215 

teachings.  All  this  does  not  j^et  affect  the  case.  We 
may  think  lightly  of  all  such  discrepancies  if  all  we  wish 
for  is  an  open  path  to  the  mind  of  Christ.  Only  the 
craving  for  an  explicit  and  final  "  authority  "  makes 
them  serious.  The  path  is  open  enough.  There  is  a 
lifelikeness  about  His  figure  as  it  is  now  conceived  by 
the  world  which  seems  to  me  to  be  unmistakable. 
There  is  a  verisimilitude  and  coherence  in  His  teach- 
ing which  is  sufficient  to  vindicate  its  historical  ac- 
curacy. When  I  listen  I  am  convinced  that  "  never 
man  spake  like  this  man  "  upon  those  subjects  with 
which  He  concerns  Himself.  I  am  arrested  first  by 
what  He  says ;  and  then  by  the  effect  of  His  teaching 
upon  His  own  life  and  destiny. 

He  begins  by  saying,  "  I  am  the  Son  of  Man  " — an 
oriental  form  of  speech  intimating  his  preeminent  pos- 
session of  those  qualities  which  belong  to  humanity. 
As  one  of  his  contemporaries  would  have  said  when 
wishing  to  assert  his  love  of  peace,  "  I  am  the  Son  of 
peace ;  "  or  another  vaunting  his  valor  would  say,  "  I 
am  the  son  of  war,"  so  he  at  the  very  beginning  chal- 
lenges attention  to  the  essential  nature  of  Man.  He 
declares  that  when  the  consciousness  of  humanity  is 
carried  to  the  ultimate  power  it  becomes  conscious  of 
Divinity.  He  applies  to  himself  the  two  phrases  Son 
of  Man  and  Son  of  God  as  interchangeable.  He  ap- 
peals directly  to  human  consciousness  as  the  witness 
of  God's  essential  fatherhood.  He  was  the  first  to 
take  his  stand  upon  this  fundamental  rock.     He  stood 


216  GOD    MANIFEST 

upon  it,  and  allowed  all  contradictoiy  forces  to  break 
themselves  against  him.     He  said  in  effect : 

"  One  is  your  father,  even  God.  It  is  not  Ilis  will 
that  a  hair  of  your  head  should  be  lost.  You  may 
trust  Him  absolutely,  not  only  to  do  wiseh^  by  you, 
but  to  do  lovingly  by  you.  The  forces  of  the  universe 
are  dominated  by  good  will.  The  essential  nature  of 
God  is  not  might,  nor  wisdom,  but  love.  God  is  love. 
This  is  the  fundamental  fact  of  existence  and  always 
has  been.  Even  in  eternity  God  was  moved  by  that 
imperious  instinct  of  propagation  whereby  love  ex- 
presses itself  among  all  living  things.  God  is  from 
eternity,  father  and  son.  Ye  are  His  offspring.  The 
universe  is  the  Father's  child.  Wherever  any  atom  of 
it  rises  into  self-consciousness  it  becomes  aware  of  its 
kinship  with  God.  This  is  its  most  primal  instinct, 
Whenever  it  comes  to  itself  it  says,  '  I  will  arise  and 
go  to  my  Father.'  " 

Jesus  claims  a  unique  and  exceptional  clearness  of 
vision  for  Himself  here.  He  asserts  that  men  are  not 
alive  to  what  is  the  fundamental  fact  concerning  them- 
selves, their  descent  from  God.  He  does  see  it  dis- 
tinctly, it  is  the  fact  which  governs  His  conduct.  He 
asserts  that  He  discerns  it  because  He  is  the  "  man  most 
man."  At  this  point  arises  the  inquirj^,  how  did  He 
come  to  see  that  which  other  men  do  not  see,  or  see  so 
dimly  ?  Was  it  in  virtue  of  any  peculiar  quality  or  gift 
belonging  to  Him  which  is  wanting  in  other  men  ?  I  de- 
fer for  the  present  the  attempt  to  answer  this  question 


GOD    MANIFEST  217 

farther  than  to  call  attention  to  the  uncompromising 
way  in  which  He  called  upon  all  to  see  and  act  upon 
the  fact  exactly  as  He  saw  and  acted  upon  it. 

He  roundly  asserted  to  men  and  women  at  all  stages 
of  moral  and  intellectual  acuteness  or  obtuseness, — 
"  Ye  are  the  children  of  your  Father  who  is  in  heaven  ; 
His  dominant  quality  is  paternal  affection ;  this  affec- 
tion wraps  you  round  about  and  can  no  more  be  de- 
tached from  you  than  can  a  mother's  love  from  a  suck- 
ing child ;  if  you  will  only  open  your  eyes  you  will  see 
that  this  is  true  ;  if  you  will  act  upon  it  practically  you 
will  discover  that  even  those  forces  which  bring  you 
into  distress  bend  to  it  and  are  to  be  interpreted  by  it. 
I  do  so." 

From  this  ground  of  truth  He  goes  on  to  announce  a 
practical  corollary, — "K  ye  are  all  children  of  one 
father  ye  are  therefore  brethren  of  one  another.  Then 
you  must  act  accordingly." 

Men  have  been  accustomed  to  act  upon  the  theory 
that  beyond  certain  very  narrow  limits,  they  cannot 
trust  their  fortunes  to  the  operation  of  the  sense  of 
humaneness,  that  is  of  mutual  kinship,  with  its  corre- 
sponding affection.  They  have  looked  upon  the  mass 
of  men  as  strangers  from  whom  little  or  nothing  of 
good  was  to  be  expected.  Each  has  been  habitually 
on  the  alert  to  guard  himself  and  his  own  interests,  to 
protect  those  by  resenting  all  attack,  and  if  need  be  by 
destroying  the  aggressor.  He  says,  "  In  My  kingdom 
which  is  the  regime  of  God  men  will  not  act  so.     If 


218  GOD    MANIFEST 

any  man  love  father  or  mother  or  sister  or  brother 
more  than  Me  he  is  not  worthy  of  Me.  If  any  man 
take  up  a  sword,  he  shall  perish  by  the  sword." 

E'ow,  it  is  abundantly  evident  to  thoughtful  men 
that  this  is  true.  Even  wise  men  do  not  fight.  Any 
scheme  of  life  which  revolves  about  the  principle  of 
selfishness  is  self-destructive.  It  moves  in  a  vicious 
circle  from  which  it  never  can  escape.  Nature  red  in 
tooth  and  claw  with  ravin  is  the  standing  parable  of 
its  truth.  If  a  strong  man  armed  keep  his  house,  the 
strength  of  his  fortification  challenges  the  strength 
and  resources  of  the  robber.  If  a  nation  build  up  an 
armament  against  another  nation,  it  is  answered  by  a 
corresponding  armament.  Each  one  must  of  necessity 
add  force  to  force  in  the  titanic  rivalry  until  the  burden 
of  the  armor  become  crushing.  Then  it  must  fight  for 
the  opportunity  to  disarm.  When,  finally,  one  stands  su- 
preme, overlooking  its  shattered  rivals,  its  very  atti- 
tude evokes  enemies,  and  again  begins  the  horrible 
cycle.  But  men  while  seeing  this  have  thought  that 
it  was  just  one  of  the  world's  conditions  which  must 
be  accepted  and  within  whose  bloody  frontier  they 
must  pass  their  existence  either  in  actual  or  possible 
violence.  Jesus  says, — "You  must  disarm  without 
waiting  for  your  neighbor  to  lay  down  his  weapons. 
Take  the  attitude  of  a  little  child  who  ventures  into 
the  arena  with  a  smile.  At  first  you  may  be  trampled 
upon  or  hurled  violently  out  of  the  way  with  damage 
to  yourself,  for  the  lust  of  blood  is  strong  upon  the 


GOD    MANIFEST  219 

gladiators  and  they  are  urged  upon  one  another  by  the 
world's  clamor.  But  do  not  fear.  Not  a  hair  of  your 
head  shall  be  wasted.  If  you  are  smitten  on  the  one 
cheek  turn  the  other  ;  if  your  brother  curse  you  bless 
him ;  if  he  take  your  coat  offer  him  your  cloak ;  only 
by  acting  so  can  you  uncover  and  set  in  play  that 
force  which  in  the  long  run  is  the  only  potent  one  to 
which  your  fortunes  may  be  safely  tied,  the  power  of 
love." 

Now,  it  is  obvious  that  all  this  is  true,  and  also  that 
the  world  is  slowly  coming  to  see  that  it  is  true  and 
to  act  upon  it.  The  slow  but  steady  gentling  of  man- 
ners is  but  the  slow  conquest  of  Jesus'  theory  of  life 
over  its  rival  theory. 

But  He  does  not  shut  His  eyes  to  the  immediate  con- 
sequence of  this  mode  of  life  to  those  who  adopt  it.  It 
will  bring  a  cross.  Indeed,  He  calls  His  theory  the 
way  of  the  cross.  This,  in  His  mind,  is  that  "  doctrine 
of  the  cross  "  which  His  followers,  having  their  minds 
filled  with  the  Hebrew  and  Pagan  ideas  upon  which 
they  had  been  reared,  quickly  transformed  into  the 
theory  of  "  Expiation."  He  proposed  not  to  bear  the 
cross  for  the  people,  but  that  they  should  each  take  up 
his  own  cross  and  follow  in  His  steps.  But  He  always 
declares  that  that  way  life  lies,  and  death  the  other 
way. 

I  have  stated  in  the  last  paragraph  what  seems  to 
me  to  be  the  points  which  give  the  elements  of  the 
orbit  of  Jesus'  teaching  in  that  portion  which  touches 


220  GOD    MANIFEST 

upon  human  living.  These  are,  the  paternal  love  of 
God ;  the  kinship  of  men ;  and  the  Doctrine  of  the 
Cross.  Are  they  the  dicta  of  a  man  ?  or  of  a  God  ?  or 
of  a  God-man  ?  This  last  alternative  has  long  been  a 
phrase  to  conjure  by.  Blind  orthodoxy  has  mumbled 
it  as  the  pagan,  suckled  in  a  creed  outgrown,  mutters 
his  Kam  !  Earn !  Kam  !  But  on  the  other  hand  it  has 
served  wise  and  holy  men  as  the  fittest  short  term 
they  could  apply  to  Jesus  Christ.  It  is  a  condensation 
of  the  phrases  by  which  He  habitually  describes  Him- 
self, Son  of  God  and  Son  of  Man.  These  terms  upon 
His  lips  seem  to  be  the  expression  of  a  complex  ex- 
perience in  His  own  consciousness.* 

When  His  sense  of  being  as  a  man  is  most  intense 
He  speaks  with  the  most  profound  sense  of  Divinity. 
Yet  there  is  clearly  no  trace  or  suggestion  of  mental 
disturbance.  One  has  only  to  listen  to  His  serene  self- 
contained  lucid  speech  to  feel  that  "this  madness 
would  gambol  from."  "What  will  account  for  this 
strange  sense  of  oneness  with  God  ?  There  is  nothing 
in  it  which  resembles  the  "  God-intoxication  "  of  the 
oriental  enthusiast.  Kor  is  there  anything  which  calls 
to  mind  Socrates'  familiar  da3mon.  While  His  con- 
sciousness was  complex  it  was  clearly  single.     What- 

'  But  little  study  seems  to  have  been  given  to  the  psychology  of 
Jesus.  So  far  as  I  am  avpare  but  oue  extant  book  deals  with  the  pe- 
culiar psychological  processes  in  Him  which  are  indicated  by  His  dis- 
courses, replies  and  actions,  and  this  book  not  successfull3\ 

See  Bernard;  Blental  Characteristics  of  Jesus,  Also  Canon  Gore  ; 
Dissertations. 


GOD    MANIFEST  221 

ever  its  component  elements  may  have  been  they  were 
perfectly  fused  in  a  single  personality.^  "Whenever  He 
thought,  moved  or  acted,  one  feels  that  it  wsls  the  ac- 
tion of  the  whole  being.  But  it  is  equally  clear  that 
He  claimed  an  essential  Divine  quality  for  His  words 
and  person  which  has  no  parallel  among  men.  The 
consensus  of  human  judgment  has  dismissed  as  a  mad- 
man or  as  a  blasphemer  every  other  man  who  has  so 
much  as  intimated  a  similar  claim.  It  is  very  note- 
worthy that  both  these  explanations  of  His  character 
were  given  during  His  life ;  and  that  they  were  both 
rejected  by  a  community  which  kneAv  Him  well  and 
was  hostile  to  Him.  His  own  explanation  of  His  God- 
consciousness  would  seem  to  be  plain  enough,  whether 
or  not  it  be  accepted  as  true  to  the  facts  of  the  case. 
He  asserts  with  much  iteration  that  it  was  due  to  His 
mode  of  living ;  and  that  it  was  open  to  any  other  who 
chose  to  follow  Him.  He  first  uncovered  and  then 
resolutely  folloAved  that  moral  energy  in  Himself  which 
He  asserted  to  be  pre-potent,  that  motive  which  ex- 
presses itself  in  thought  as  an  absolute  confidence 
in  God's  fatherliness,  and  in  action  by  living  in  love 
with  one's  fellows.  His  outward  life  would  seem  to 
be  but  the  exemplification  of  the  fortunes  of  one  who 
has  achieved  such  an  inward  triumph.  The  force  of 
things  as  they  are  lays  upon  such  a  one  a  cross ;  it 

'I  need  hardly  point  ont  that  the  term  "personal"  as  used  in 
speaking  of  the  Trinity,  for  example,  has  little  in  common  with  the 
term  "  personal  "  as  used  in  common  speech. 


222  GOD    MATiTIFEST 

leads  him  to  death ;  but  cannot  break  the  continuity 
of  his  existence  through  and  after  death,  for  the  rea- 
son that  the  force  to  which  he  has  adjusted  himself  is 
more  persistent  and  more  potent  than  the  environment 
which  contains  him. 

Here  many  notions  very  common  among  Christian 
folk  must  be  definitely  abandoned.  To  think  of  Him 
as  a  self-conscious  personality  "  coming "  to  this  out- 
lying world  from  the  seat  of  God's  eternal  power  re- 
mote in  space,  and  incarnating  Himself  in  the  form  of 
man  with  an  independent  self-conscious  human  soul,  is 
in  fact  not  to  think  at  all.  To  accept  such  a  piece  of 
mental  imagery  and  call  it  a  "  mystery  "  is  unworthy. 
Men  are  prone  to  sit  down  at  the  border  of  what  they 
choose  to  call  holy  ground  under  the  pretense  of  tak- 
ing off  their  shoes  when  their  real  motive  is  intellectual 
indolence.  There  is  a  candor  and  forthrightness  about 
the  New  Testament  Scriptures  which  invites  to  an 
examination  not  only  of  what  Jesus  is,  but  of  how  He 
came  to  be  what  He  is. 

Let  one  in  this  reverent  and  fearless  mood  open  the 
gospels  and  he  will  find  himself  at  home.  He  will  be 
met  at  the  threshold  with  the  challenge  Behold  the 
Man  !  If  he  look  upon  Him  long  enough,  steadfastly 
enough,  and  with  sufficiently  clear  sight  he  will  be 
likely  to  cry,  "  My  Lord,  and  my  God  !  " 

He  was  a  man,  a  Hebrew,  a  ISTazarene,  born  A.  IT. 
C.  about  746.  His  roots  were  in  the  crumbling  gen- 
erations.    Hewasarodof  the  stem  of  Jesse.     Heredity 


GOD    MANIFEST  223 

and  environment  wrought  in  and  upon  Him  as  well  as 
another.  Of  His  early  life  absolutely  nothing  is 
known.  Of  His  youth  a  single  incident  is  told  which 
may  very  well  have  happened,  or  may  equally  well 
have  been  a  pious  imagining  thrown  backward  upon 
His  early  life  from  later  years  by  those  who  loved  His 
memory.  He  comes  upon  the  stage  as  a  man  in  ma- 
ture life,  in  response  to  the  summons  of  a  prophet  who 
sternly  preached  the  gospel  of  Repentance.  To  this 
preaching  He  at  first  responds,  but  after  a  little  pro- 
nounces it  to  be  inadequate.  He  lays  His  axe  to  the 
root  of  the  tree.  He  substitutes  for  John's  gospel  the 
gospel  of  the  l^ew  Life.  Repentance  may  indeed  rid 
the  soul  of  parlous  stuff,  but  it  will  give  no  guarantee 
of  future  purity.  It  opens  no  spring  of  spiritual  life. 
It  is  a  mechanical  process  of  cleansing.  What  is 
needed  is  a  vital  process  of  growth.  The  prophet  who 
had  made  experiment  of  his  own  medicament  was  the 
first  to  acknowledge  this.  He  foretells  the  decadence 
of  his  own  gospel  and  the  increase  of  the  new  one. 
And  Jesus  declares  that  great  as  is  the  Prophet  of  Re- 
pentance the  least  in  the  kingdom  of  life  is  greater 
than  he. 

That  Jesus  had  slowly  and  painfully  wrought  out 
His  spiritual  discovery  is  plain.  He  had  in  the  new 
life  achieved  consciousness  of  His  divinity  and  rec- 
ognized the  secret  voice  of  God  saying,  "  Thou  art  My 
well-beloved  Son ;  this  day  have  I  begotten  Thee." 
But  He  held  it  yet  unstably  and  in  spiritual  tumult. 


224  GOD    MANIFEST 

It  must  be  tested  before  He  could  definitely  entrust 
His  fortunes  to  it.  Nothing  could  be  more  psycho- 
logically accurate  than  the  story  of  the  Temptation  in 
the  desert.  The  firstborn  as  well  as  all  his  brethren 
must  face  temptation  solitary.  In  the  secret  place  of 
his  innermost  life  he  must  make  trial  of  his  new  felt 
divinity.  Will  he  satisfy  his  hunger  for  bread  or  his 
hunger  for  righteousness  ?  Will  he  commit  his  destiny 
to  those  forces  which  build  up  the  kingdom  of  the 
world  and  the  glory  of  them  ?  Or  wiU  he  serve  the 
eternal  force  which  stirs  within  him  ?  Will  he  cast 
himself  down  from  the  spiritual  elevation  where  he  is, 
trusting  that  somehow  God  will  bring  his  life  to  a 
right  issue  ?  The  threefold  aspect  of  His  Temptation 
is  not  exhaustive  but  it  is  typical.  It  attacked  His 
slowly  achieved  but  distinct  consciousness  of  His  divine 
nature.  From  that  time  on  His  life  was  a  constant 
temptation.  His  theory  of  living  was  tested  by  the 
reactions  upon  it  of  social  life,  of  religious  institutions, 
of  political  arrangements.  John,  preaching  the  gospel 
of  Repentance,  could  withdraw  from  all  these  and  fight 
his  barren  battle  as  well  in  the  wilderness  as  else- 
where. Jesus'  Way  could  only  be  tested  by  living, 
and  is  possible  only  in  the  midst  of  life.  After  His 
final  storm  of  doubtfulness  and  hesitation  had  subsided 
He  walked  serenely  into  the  market-place,  the  syna- 
gogue, the  home,  the  firstborn  of  a  new  race,  and,  in 
consequence,  the  firstborn  of  the  sons  of  God.  Trust- 
ing Himself  to  the  heavenly  arms  which  He  believed 


GOD    MANIFEST  225 

to  be  about  Him,  He  appealed  unhesitatingly  to  the 
good  will  of  men.  The  result  of  His  experiment  is  re- 
corded in  the  gospels.  At  once  He  called  for  followers. 
The  condition  which  He  exacted  was  that  each  of 
them  should  discover  within  himself  the  same  confi- 
dence in  God's  essential  fatherliness,  and  the  same  in- 
expugnable good  will  to  men  which  was  in  Himself. 
The  Sermon  on  the  Mount  was  His  address  to  the  lit- 
tle forlorn  hope.  Some  of  them  it  frightened.  They 
went  backward  and  walked  no  more  with  Him.  The 
author  of  Ecce  Homo  has  pointed  out  with  transcend- 
ent subtilty  and  truth  the  way  in  which  His  "  Call " 
acted  as  a  winnowing  fan  in  His  hand.  It  winnowed 
ruthlessly.  He  was  seeking  for  seed  from  which 
should  spring  a  new  race  of  men,  and  would  have  none 
except  such  as  possessed  the  principle  of  life  in  it. 
That  He  selected  wisely,  the  issue  has  shown,  for  each 
little  one  has  become  a  thousand.  But  it  was  clear  to 
Him  from  the  first  that  the  conditions  of  life  were  such 
that,  until  they  should  be  changed,  it  would  be  impossi- 
ble for  any  one  acting  as  He  proposed  to  retain  his  life. 
He  called  his  working  theory  of  life  by  the  short 
word  "  Faith."  Hardly  any  word  in  human  speech  has 
since  been  so  misused.  What  He  meant  by  it  is  clear. 
He  meant  that  act  of  the  will  by  which  one  determines 
to  live  by  the  rule  of  love  and  trust.  Whoever  wills  so 
possesses  Faith  in  proportion  to  the  strenuousness  of 
his  determination.  "  Believing  in  Him  "  meant  the 
moral  conviction  that  His  "  Way  "  was  a  right  and  prac- 


226  GOD    MANIFEST 

ticable  way.  The  word  in  religious  speech  has  ahiiost 
entirely  lost  its  original  connotation.  It  has  come  to 
be  practically  synonymous  with  credulity  in  one  con- 
nection, and  with  religious  emotion  in  another.  One 
can  see  even  in  the  later  Epistles,  especially  those  of 
St.  Paul,  the  beginning  of  this  change  of  use.  With 
Jesus,  "  believing  "  simply  meant  the  willingness  to  ad- 
venture in  this  world  upon  a  mode  of  life  under  the 
domination  of  divine  and  human  love.  The  difficulty 
and  painf ulness  of  such  a  life  are  so  great  that  one  will 
only  adopt  it  under  the  light  of  a  moral  illumination 
equivalent  to  being  born  again.  He  who  has  achieved 
it  has,  in  Jesus'  phrase,  "  come  to  himself."  That  is, 
he  has  discovered  what  is  the  essential  and  constant 
quality  in  his  own  nature. 

The  outcome  of  this  life  of  faith  in  the  case  of 
Jesus  is  well  known.  His  way  was  in  the  face  of  all  ac- 
cepted manners.  He  exasperated  alike  the  moralist, 
the  ecclesiastic,  and  the  conventionally  religious  man, 
the  sociologist  and  the  magistrate.  If  He  was  right 
they  were  wrong.  If  His  kingdom  were  to  prevail 
theirs  must  needs  perish.  The  world  was  not  without 
a  morality.  It  had  a  method  of  conduct  evolved  from 
the  experience  of  the  race,  stated  in  terms  of  juris- 
prudence, sustained  by  immemorial  custom,  fortified 
by  religious  observance  and  ecclesiastical  ritual.  The 
representatives  of  every  one  of  these  turned  upon 
Him.  He  did  not  attack  them  or  propose  any  reform 
for  them.     He  bore  Himself  toward  them  all  much  as 


GOD    MANIFEST  22 Y 

a  man  would  bear  himself  toward  the  fantastic  ar- 
rangements of  a  village  of  lunatics  in  which  he  found 
himself  living.  Actions  which  seemed  to  them 
natural  and  therefore  bounden,  He  declined  altogether 
to  perform.  His  notion  of  nature  was  not  theirs. 
Conduct  which  seemed  to  them  unnatural  and  impracti- 
cable He  demanded  and  showed.  With  an  amazing 
appearance  of  simplicity  He  assured  them  that  their 
laws  were  unrighteous,  their  ritual  irreligious,  their 
ethics  immoral,  their  church  a  synagogue  of  satan.  He 
tested  all  men  and  all  institutions  by  their  actual  effect 
upon  the  lives  of  men.  He  pronounced  them  and  theirs 
ungodly  because  He  found  them  to  be  inhuman.  The 
Church  existed  for  its  own  aggrandizement.  The  State 
had  no  ruth.  The  rich  had  no  bowels  of  compassion. 
He  turned  away  from  them  all  in  a  sort  of  divine 
rage,  after  heaping  maledictions  upon  them  which  they 
never  forgave.  He  discovered  that  they  were  all  so 
committed  to  their  mode  of  living  that  there  was 
no  hope  of  their  accepting  His  mode.  Then  He 
turned  to  the  people,  the  common  people,  the  average 
man,  who  then  as  always  simply  accepts  existing  con- 
ditions of  life  without  deliberately  giving  bonds  to 
them.  These  were  sufficiently  free  to  adopt  His  life 
of  Faith  if  they  chose.  At  first  they  heard  Him 
gladly.  His  display  of  the  beatitudes  which  lay  far 
along  in  the  path  to  which  He  invited  them  was  allur- 
ing. But  when  they  confronted  the  Cross  which 
those  must  needs  carry  Avho  trod  that  path,  they  fell 


228  GOD    MANIFEST 

away.  Only  a  few,  whose  natures  were  remotely 
akin  to  His  own  walked  with  Him,  Evil  and  selfish 
men  shrank  from  Him  as  driven  by  a  magnetic  repul- 
sion. Among  all  His  followers  was  not  one  who 
would  not  antecedently  have  been  pronounced  good. 
Even  the  Magdalene  was  already  sick  of  her  sin  into 
which  she  had  been  drawn  by  the  excess  of  her  love. 
It  could  not  be  said  of  her, — "Thy  sin's  not  acci- 
dental ;  'tis  a  trade."  The  malefactor  who  hung  upon 
the  neighboring  cross  was  a  misguided  patriot,  brave 
and  devoted  enough  to  have  struck  a  blow  in  insurrec- 
tion against  that  tyranny  which  his  countrymen  con- 
tented themselves  with  safely  cursing.  He  drew  to 
Him  the  pure,  the  tender,  the  generous,  the  brave,  the 
spiritually  minded.  They  who  had  ears  to  hear  heard. 
For  the  rest,  having  ears  they  heard  not,  and  seeing 
they  did  not  understand. 

He  bade  those  who  chose  to  share  His  life  of  Faith 
become  in  every  particular  like  Himself.  When 
they  were  struck  with  the  sight  of  His  moral  exalta- 
tion, He  bade  them  surpass  the  moral  point  at  which 
He  was,  and  to  be  perfect  even  as  their  Father  in 
heaven  is  perfect.  When  they  marvelled  at  some  of 
His  mighty  works  he  assured  them  that  it  was  possi- 
ble for  them  to  do  even  greater  works  than  these.  At 
every  point  of  His  own  development  He  paused  to  as- 
sure His  hesitating  disciples  that  the  way  was  as  open 
for  them  as  for  Him,  and  to  bid  them  "  follow  Me." 
He  declares  Himself  to  be  the  manifestation  of  God  in 


GOD    MANIFEST  229 

man.  The  burden  of  His  work  and  life  is  that  if  a 
man  will  unhesitatingly  follow  the  divine  nature  which 
is  in  him  he  will  come  into  his  own  natural  inheritance 
of  powers  undreamed  of  and  amazing. 

That  He  found  Himself  able  to  perform  "many 
mighty  works  "  seems  unquestionable.  It  is  possible, 
to  be  sure,  to  disentangle  the  person  of  Jesus  from  the 
whole  "  miraculous "  setting  in  which  the  gospels 
frame  Him.  Unitarianism  and  soi  disant  "  Liberal 
Christianity  "  has  essayed  the  task  to  do  so.  They 
pique  themselves  somewhat  upon  their  success.  But 
the  figure  thus  separated  out,  and  to  which  they  point 
saying  Ecce  Homo,  is  so  wan,  pallid,  vague  and  unsub- 
stantial that  it  arouses  in  the  passer-by  but  a  languid 
interest.  It  is  easier,  upon  the  whole,  to  admit  the 
fact  of  His  strange  works  than  it  is  to  account  for  the 
historical  Christ  without  them.  It  may  well  be  that 
some  "  signs "  are  attributed  to  Him  in  the  gospel 
record  which  He  did  not  do  ;  and  that  some  marvellous 
things  which  He  did  do  have  perished  from  memory. 
Indeed,  this  would  seem  to  be  the  testimony  of  the 
gospels  themselves.  But  that  He  possessed  and  exer- 
cised occult  powers  appears  true.  And  it  seems 
equally  true  that  in  varying  degree.  His  disciples  did 
the  like.  It  is  interesting,  but  not  obligatory,  to  ex- 
amine and  come  to  a  definite  belief  concerning  this 
one  or  that  among  His  miracles.  The  essential  thing 
is  to  find  some  intelligible  rationale  of  His  seemingly 
unique  powers. 


230  GOD    MANIFEST 

Unthinking  traditionalism  here  looks  upon  Jesus  as 
God  masquerading  in  human  guise.  God  is  for  it  the 
antithesis  of  "  Nature."  Wherever  He  appears  in  na- 
ture a  circumference  of  disturbance  surrounds  him. 
Natural  processes  are  interrupted,  set  aside,  or  turned 
backward  at  will.  If  He  appear  in  the  "  person  "  ^  of  a 
man,  it  is  still  not  a  man  but  God  who  acts.  But  this 
conception  empties  Jesus'  nature  of  all  significance 
and  meaning.  It  was  not  His  explanation  of  His 
power,  nor  does  the  record  of  His  mighty  deeds  fit  this 
conception.  He  speaks  and  acts  constantly  as  though 
He  conceived  what  we  call  "  supernatural  ■'  powers  to 
be  intrinsically  natural  to  any  man  who  would  live  as 
He  lived.  When  He  walks  upon  the  water  He  chides 
His  friend  Peter  for  sinking.  When  the  disciples  con- 
fessed their  inability  to  heal  a  lunatic,  He  upbraided 
them  as  a  faithless  and  jDerverse  lot.  He  asserts  in 
general  that  "  all  things  are  possible  to  them  that  be- 
lieve." If  in  any  instance  a  disciple  makes  assay  of 
his  "  supernatural "  power  and  fails,  Jesus  ascribes  the 
failure  to  lack  of  "  Faith."  Let  us  now  recur  to  His 
definition  of  Faith.  We  will  see  that  it  has  nothing  in 
common  with  that  credulity  which  is  content  to 
stupidly  walk  blindfold  ;  nor  with  that  imaginary  act 
of  the  will  by  which  it  offers  to  coerce  the  understand- 
ing into  accepting  as  true  that  at  which  the  under- 
standing rebels.  It  denotes  a  looi'Mng  theory  of  life. 
It  is  the  fact  of  submitting  one's  self  unreservedly  to 

'  Latin  2>ersona,  i.  e.,  a  mask. 


GOD    MANIFEST  231 

the  goodness  of  God,  and  living  in  inexpugnable  love 
for  one's  fellows.  Such  a  manner  of  life,  He  teaches, 
will,  if  persevered  in,  uncover  in  the  individual  adopt- 
ing it  potentialities  which  are  intrinsically  "  natural " 
to  men,  but  which  seem  "  supernatural "  to  the  majority 
because  their  mode  of  life  has  no  place  in  it  for  their 
exercise.  It  is  a  peculiarly  Christian  faculty  only,  as 
He  asserts  in  varied  phrase,  because  Christians  alone 
are  really  humane  ;  and  belongs  to  Him  in  complete- 
ness because  He  is  preeminently  the  Son  of  Man.  It 
is  an  appanage  of  the  Christian  mode  of  living.  Even 
John  the  Baptist  "did  no  signs."  John  was  not  a 
Christian.  He  was  the  consummate  fruit  of  the  world's 
mode  of  living.  His  Baptism  of  Kepentance  did,  and 
can,  wash  the  soul  of  many  foul  spots.  But  the 
Christian  life  is  the  reopening  of  clogged  fountains  in 
the  essential  nature  of  man. 

Were  the  miracles  of  Jesus  the  works  of  God  ?  or  of 
a  man  ?  I  reply,  his  assumption  is  that  they  w^ere  of 
God  because  they  were  the  natural  expression  of  what 
He  asserts  to  be  the  divine  quality  inherent  in  man. 
In  Him,  this  divine  faculty  had  become  self-conscious, 
and  by  so  doing  had  come  to  recognize  its  oneness  with 
the  God-father.  For  this  reason  He  found  it  natural 
for  Him  to  think  and  act  in  such  Avays  as  we  are  ac- 
customed to  think  natural  only  to  God. 

His  powers  w^ere  not  absolute  or  without  limit. 
They  found  the  frontier  of  their  exercise  at  the  limit 
of  human  capacity.     There  were  places  and  occasions 


232  GOD    MANIFEST 

where  "  He  could  not  do  many  mighty  works."  The 
limits  which  concluded  His  knowledge  concluded  His 
power.  Of  a  certain  thing  He  said  that  "no  man 
knoweth  it,  not  even  the  Son,  but  the  Father."  In  a 
word,  from  a  human  child  He  increased  in  wisdom 
and  stature  and  in  favor  with  man  and  God  until  He 
touched  the  circumference  of  human  capacity,  and 
"  manifested  "  aU  of  God  which  Humanit}^  is  capable 
of  expressing.  What  more  could  He?  He  is,  for 
men^  the  perfect  expression  of  God.  He  manifests 
all  of  God  that  man  can  contain,  or  can  see.  His 
contention  is  that  He  reaches  that  divine  fullness  of 
life  by  carrying  to  its  ultimate  the  essential  nature 
and  faculty  of  man.  He  bids  men  follow  Him.  St. 
Paul  sees  "  the  measure  and  stature  of  a  perfect  man 
in  Christ."  He  is  the  "firstborn  among  many 
brethren."  By  the  will  of  a  man  He  overcame  the 
obstacles  to  the  development  of  a  man,  and  having 
done  so  discovered  that  He  was  the  Son  of  God. 
Then  He  turns  to  His  brethren  and  bids  them  come 
to  themselves,  and  b}^  so  doing  discover  their  common 
kinship  Avith  God. 

Thus  He  becomes  to  us  Jesus,  the  Christ,  the  an- 
nointed  one,  His  only  Son,  our  Lord. 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  CROSS 


xrv 

THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   CROSS 

It  is  because  it  is  of  the  essential  nature  of  God  to 
bear  the  Cross  that  men  assume  it  whenever  they 
awake  to  their  own  divineness.  It  is  not  easy  to  ac- 
count for  the  strange  reluctance  to  associate  the  idea 
of  suffering  with  God.  More  sober  thought  would 
show  that  it  must  perforce  be  the  constant  fact  and 
habit  of  his  existence.  His  life  must  be  an  eternal 
pang  as  well  as  an  eternal  ecstasy.  Suffering  is  the 
correlative  and  background  of  love  for  any  inferior  by 
any  superior  personality.  If  the  lover  love  more  than 
the  loved  he  must  suffer  in  the  loving.  If  the  lover 
be  wiser  than  the  loved  he  must  bear  solicitude  and 
pain  for  the  ignorance  of  the  loved.  If  he  be  better 
than  the  object  of  his  affection  he  must  carry  the  heavy 
load  of  sorrow  for  the  frailties  of  the  loved.  Pain  is 
the  sad  necessity  of  parentage.  At  such  time  as  the  sons 
of  God  shouted  together  for  joy  their  Father's  burden 
began.  Creation  involves  suffering  for  God.  The 
father  sitting  in  his  house  and  aware  moment  by  mo- 
ment of  the  doing  of  his  prodigal  child  must  bear  in 
his  heart  the  aching  agony  of  a  yearning  love  which 
is  compelled  to  bide  the  time  of  its  fruition.  The 
whole  creation  groaning  and  travailing  in  pain  to- 

235 


2^0 


THK    KfM'TKINK    oK     IIIK    <UOHS 


^rcthor  iiiiiHi  Miii^'  tlM^  sli;i<l<.\v  nl"  its  n^ony  iutohs  tlio 
fiico  of  Mm  All  I''jiMi(ir.  "Cnicilir.l  Iruiii  the  fouiulu- 
liori  (if  tlm  worhl"  \h  not  a  jiliniHo  coiiuid  in  llio  busy 
i<ll(!iirHK  (»r  pliilosopliy,  Itiil,  iUt)  Hr'uiuUWc  stiitcinont  of 
an  ()t(5rniil  riicl.  It  Ih  thn  concomilanl  of  Cniiition  in 
th«  oxpori('!n(M>  of  (to<l.  Now  it  has  liccn  said  ahovo, 
cmil-ion  \H  l.o  nil  jiracl  ical  |iiir|M»;,c.s  clmial.  That  is 
1,0  Hay,  foi-  all  hiiiiiaii  uses  llmiinhi,  i(,Ht«lf  Ih  condil ioiicd 
ii|ion  piMUionunia..  Mr(a|)liysicH  may  fancy  that  it, 
can  <on<M'ivn  of  (iod  iixistiii;;;  in  siM-nno  ahsolntnu'ss 
licfot-n  I  ho  univci'Ho  was,  or  as  ind('|a'ii(h<nt  upon  all 
pliriioMKMia.  Hill,  if  lh(i  contt-ni  of  such  fancy  h« 
(•,ar(^fMlly  cixainiiird  il  will  he  found  to  he  cnipty.  It 
will  hn  found  to  contain  symhols  and  not,  fcalitics. 
(Jod,  lor  UH,  iH  iKXprcHHcd  in  terms  <d'  ('real  ion.  'I'hcni 
jirn  no  «»thcr  terms,  or,  lo  s|»eaU  more  acM-urately,  W(» 
<>,annot  alUrm  oi-  deny  that  there  are  any  othor  terms, 
.hisus' n,Hserl  ion  is  that  ('reation  and  the  ('ross  How 
Himultarniously  out  <»f  the  rssmlial  i|ualily  <d"  (Jod 
whi('h  is  Love.  SI-.  I'aul  inlnnales  thai  they  will 
ultimately  he  ahsorhed  together  "  when  tlii^  Son  also 
Himself  shall  Ih<  snhjtK^t  to  the  l''alht«r,  that  (iod  nuiy 
j)n  idl  in  all."  HetweiMi  thesis  two  ht'iniiii  th<< 
whoh^  di-ania,  of  existence  is  ((nicliided.  Within  this 
span  is  to  he  soii^^ht,  if  anywhere,  the  nature  o|  (Jod 
and  the  destiny  of  man.  Jesus' <h)ctriiie  of  the  Cross 
is  therefore  idi^itical  with  1 1  is  doct  rine  of  (iod.  Ii(* 
JM^ars  Mis  cr(»ss,  and  hids  men  oliserv'e  Him  th<^ 
whih^,  dtH-larin^    that    li*i    thai    hath    seen    ilini    hath 


I 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   CROSS  237 

seen  the  Father.     For  fatherhood  and  pain,  love  and 
cross-bearing  are  bound  up  together.     The  crowning 
fact  of  His  life  stands  as  the  convenient  expression 
for  the  whole  of  it.     His  nativity,  baptism,  fasting 
and  temptation,  His  agony  and  bloody  sweat.   His 
cross  and  passion  are  all  suffrages  in  the  litany  of  His 
life.     "  The  Cross  "  is  the  portable  formula  for  their 
totality.     In  this  supreme  fact  He  claims  to  be  the 
manifestation  of  the  Father.     He  declares,  in  effect, 
that  suffering   is  the   penalty  of  loving;    that  it  is 
the    expression    of    loving;    that   it   is   the   Aveapon 
of   love;    that   by   it    love    conquers;   that   this   is 
true   for   men   because   it   is   true   of   God,   and   be- 
cause   men    share    the    nature    of     God    being   His 
offspring.     Wliile   He   lived,  a   few   who  were   near 
to  Him  believed  Him.     But  even  their  belief  seems  to 
have  been  produced  more  by  the  contagiousness  of 
His  personality  than  by  a  clear  apprehension  of  His 
Truth.     Those  in  the  wider  circle  who  gathered  about 
Him   soon   deserted   Him.     Even  the  most  intimate 
group  were  in  the  end  staggered  at  the  actual  cruci- 
fixion, though  they  had  in  their  theory  accepted  it  as 
the  legitimate  outcome  of  His  Way.     His  reappear- 
ance brought  them  together  again,  but  in  a  perplexed 
and  bewildered  mood.     He  had  given  them  a  truth 
concerning  the  fundamental  fact  of  existence ;  a  way 
of  procedure  which  lie  Himself  walked  in,  and  which 
He  declared  to  be  intrinsically  Life;  but  they  were 
slow  of   heart   to  believe  that  the  obligation  of  all 


238  THE    DOCTRINE    OF   THE   CROSS 

these  was  in  the  nature  of  things.  It  has  often  been 
asserted  that  His  disciples  received  from  Him  His 
Truth  in  formal  propositions,  apprehended  it  clearly, 
and  passed  it  on  unimpaired  to  their  successors.  The 
record  itself  shows  that  this  was  not  true.  They 
comprehended  Him  but  partially.  In  great  part  they 
misconceived  Him  altogether.  They  were  far  more 
clear  as  to  His  Way  than  they  were  concerning  His 
truth.  They  could  and  did  adopt  that  mode  of  living 
which  was  His,  and  which  led  them  as  it  had  Him  to 
the  cross  or  to  the  lions.  But  of  the  Truth  upon 
which  His  Way  was  based  they  had  but  partial  un- 
derstanding. Indeed,  He  Himself  affirms  that  they 
were  not  equal  to  it,  and  that  it  could  only  be  made 
known  slowly  by  the  operation  of  the  spirit  which  He 
would  leave  behind  Him.  The  facts  of  Christianity 
came  first;  the  theory  followed  haltingly.  He  had 
previously  announced  as  the  law  of  the  case  that  "  he 
that  doeth  My  will  shall  learn  of  My  Doctrine 
whether  it  be  of  God." 

But  the  life  of  Jesus  Christ  is  an  event  in  time.  Of 
necessity  it  had  relations  to  the  time  when,  the  place 
where,  and  people  in  whose  presence  it  was  lived. 
All  these  helped  in  some  ways  and  in  others  hindered 
the  clear  shining  of  His  light.  How  they  helped  has 
often  been  remarked  upon,  how  they  hindered  has 
been  but  little  noticed.  The  movements  of  human 
history  prepared  a  way  before  Him,  but  they  also 
placed  obstacles  in  the  path   which   were  as  real  as 


THE    DOCTRINE    OF    THE    CROSS  239 

those  which  had  previously  barred  His  coming.  His 
Truth  was  conditioned  by  the  capacities  of  those  to 
whom  it  was  spoken.  The  hearts  of  many  were 
turned  to  Him,  but  the  minds  even  of  these  were 
largely  preoccupied  Avith  ways  of  thinking  foreign  to 
His  way.  After  He  had  gone  His  followers  essayed 
to  formulate  and  champion  His  Truth.  To  do  so  they 
expressed  it  in  the  terms  with  which  they  were  fa- 
miliar. In  some  ways  these  terms  were  inadequate, 
in  some  ways  they  were  faulty.  Human  speech  had 
to  be  dealt  with  as  the  missionary  in  our  day  is  com- 
pelled to  deal  with  the  meagre  languages  of  the  pagan 
tribes  to  whom  he  wishes  to  preach.  Their  vocabu- 
lary had  no  words  for  his  ideas.  He  has  to  re-create  a 
language  before  he  can  impart  his  message.  If  he  try 
to  use  the  terms  they  have  his  message  is  'cramped 
within  them  or  defiled  by  them. 

The  fatal  though  unavoidable  error  was  the  attempt 
to  express  Jesus'  Doctrine  of  the  Cross  in  the  termi- 
nology of  the  Hebrew  ideas  of  sacrifice.  His  doctrine 
of  God  crucifying  Himself  was  wide  as  God.  Their 
notion  of  "  expiation  "  was  narrow  as  Judaism.  His 
Truth  came  down  from  God.  Theirs  came  up  through 
fetishism  from  primitive  savagery.  His  was  the  ex- 
pression of  God's  true  disposition.  Theirs  was  the 
expression  of  human  fear  and  cunning.  "  I  am  from 
above,  ye  are  from  beneath,"  was  His  dictum  to  the 
Jews.  But,  unfortunately,  the  Hebrew  sacrificial 
terms  had  a  certain  superficial  fitness  when  applied  to 


240  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    THE    CROSS 

Jesus'  life.  There  was  blood  in  both.  There  was 
pain  in  both.  Thus  their  essential  antagonism  was 
obscured.  St.  Paul  the  theologian  of  the  early  Church 
strains  to  make  the  imagery  of  ex23iation  fit  with 
Jesus'  Truth  and  is  constantly  perplexed  and  perplex- 
ing. •  His  clear  conception  of  the  spirit  of  Christ 
strives  to  find  expression  in  the  terms  of  his  inherited 
thought,  and  bursts  the  formulas  which  still  constrain 
it.  The  writer  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  con- 
cludes it  altogether  within  those  formulas.^  The  in- 
stinct of  the  early  Christians  refused  to  accept  those 
statements,  and  the  Epistle  found  no  place  in  the  New 
Testament  Canon  until  that  instinct  had  been  dulled. 
But  the  Hebrew  thought  of  expiation,  which  was  itself 
a  survival  from  an  early  savagery,  thus  became  the  ac- 
cepted vehicle  for  the  expression  of  Jesus'  doctrine  of 
the  Cross.  The  ancient  Liturgies  embody  the  idea 
hecause  they  were  ancient.  Formulated  by  those  who 
were  reared  in  Judaism,  or  in  Paganism,  whose  idea 
of  expiation  they  expressed  they  have  perpetuated  the 
confusion  which  has  for  so  many  centuries  obscured 
the  central  Truth  of  Jesus.  The  same  Hebrew- 
Pagan  rationale  of  Christ's  work  early  became  fixed 
in  Christian  Theology.  The  Catholic  Creeds  do  not 
contain  it,  and  to  this  fact  above  all  else  they  owe 
their  universal  acceptance.  But  in  the  more  formu- 
lated "  Systems  "  it  has  been  for  fifteen  centuries  the 

'Pfleiderer;  Iiijlucuce  of  St.  I'dul,  (tc,  jiassim. 
'licudal;   'J'/uuloijij  of  the  Hebrew  Christians. 


THE   DOCTRIISrE    OF    THE    CROSS  241 

organizing  principle.  Chrysostom,  Augustine,  Thomas 
and  Anselm,  each  in  his  own  time  and  sphere  of  in- 
fluence formulated  it  and  fixed  it  more  and  more 
firmly  in  the  popular  Christian  mind.  It  finds  at  once 
its  simplest  and  most  naive  expression  in  the  Roman 
Mass.  It  is  equally  present,  though  mixed  with  other 
elements,  in  the  Anglican  Communion  Office.  It  is 
the  underlying  theology  of  the  Salvation  Army.  But 
the  Christian  consciousness  has  never  been  easy  under 
it.  Whenever  "  the  spirit  of  life  which  was  in  Jesus 
Christ "  has  been  strong,  this  pagan  conception  of  God 
and  His  attitude  toward  men  has  receded.  It  has 
failed  signally  as  a  motive  power  for  righteousness  of 
life.  Where  it  has  been  presented  by  the  missionary 
as  the  "  good-news  "  of  Jesus  it  has  appealed  to  a  mer- 
cenary motive,  and  led  those  who  accepted  it  to  attempt 
to  escape  from  a  threatened  peril.  For  such  security 
they  have  been  willing  to  pay  only  a  minimum  of 
self-sacrifice,  and  to  accept  but  a  formal  restraint  upon 
conduct.  To  make  the  appeal  successful  it  has  been 
necessary  to  depict  in  lurid  and  fear  compelling 
colors  the  torments  of  hell.  In  all  its  transmutations 
the  idea  has  remained  in  substance  the  childish  at- 
tempt of  the  savage  to  placate  or  buy  off  the  wrath 
of  a  maligant  and  offended  god.  This  is  equally  true 
whether  the  victim  be  thought  of  as  a  breadfruit 
offered  by  a  squalid  Papuan,  a  bull  by  a  Judean  priest 
upon  a  brazen  altar,  or  a  Man  at  Golgotha  by  the  un- 
witting jplebescite  of  a  race.     The  essence  of  all  is  the 


2rJ:2  THE   DOCTRINE    OF   THE    CROSS 

same.  It  is  the  proposal  to  purchase  from  the  Al- 
mighty b}^  gifts  a  release  from  the  penalty  of  wrong 
deeds.  Many  influences  are  now  at  work  to  banish 
and  drive  away  this  ancient  superstition  to  that  evil 
place  of  ignorance  and  fear  from  which  it  first 
emerged.  In  the  first  place,  the  origin  and  growth  of 
the  idea  of  Sacrifice  has  begun  to  be  studied.^  It  has 
but  lately  dawned  upon  us  that  races  of  men  are  upon 
earth  now  at  every  stage  of  development.  There  are 
still  Edens  in  which  Adams  are  even  now  beginning 
to  know  good  and  evil.  The  counterparts  of  Abraham 
and  Moses  and  David  and  Ezra  live  and  have  lived  at 
many  places.  At  a  certain  primitive  stage  of  progress 
this  notion  of  expiation  begins  to  show  itself  always. 
It  marks  a  stage  of  intellectual  and  moral  forwardness. 
It  is  of  the  world's  childhood.  It  gathers  about  it- 
self a  cult.  It  starts  with  the  raw  meat  proffered  to 
an  obscure  idol,  and  survives  in  the  adult  race  until  it 
be  outgrown.  So  far  from  being  a  system  revealed  to 
Israel  from  above,  it  is  seen  to  be  a  common  trait  of 
all  people  at  a  certain  stage  of  their  immaturity. 

Again,  and  more  specifically,  the  more  careful 
study  of  the  Bible  has  made  it  evident  that  the  Sacri- 
ficial System  did  not  in  point  of  fact  hold  the  place 
in  Hebrew  history  which  has  been  traditionally 
assigned   to  it."     This  is  purely  a    question  of   fact. 

'Spencer;  Data  of  Ethics,   Lubbock;  Primitive  Races,  Quatrefages; 
The  Human  Species,  etc.,  etc.,  etc. 
"^  Colenso  ;  Wellhauseu;  Robertson  Smith  ;  Driver  ;  Briggs,  etc.,  etc. 


THE   DOCTRIISrE    OF    THE    CROSS  213 

From  investigation  it  thus  appears  to  be  demonstrated 
that  Moses,  instead  of  being  the  founder  of  a  complex 
and  symmetrical  system  of  Sacrificial  Kitual  did  but 
limit  within  the  narrowest  bounds  possible  to  him  a 
habit  of  belief  and  worship  which  his  people  had  in 
common  with  all  peoples  of  like  time  and  progress. 
Like  all  prophets  he  strove  to  lift  them  to  a  higher 
and  truer  idea  of  their  real  relation  to  God;  and, 
like  all  wise  men  he  allowed  some  things  "owing  to 
the  hardness  of  their  hearts."  It  now  appears  that 
the  System  attributed  to  him  was  not  in  fact  intro- 
duced in  his  time  nor  for  many  centuries  afterward ; 
that  it  cannot  claim  either  his  sanction  or  the  sanc- 
tion of  God  ;  that  the  line  of  development  in  which 
he  and  the  Prophets  who  succeeded  him  strove  to 
lead  this  people,  was  one  which  was  obstructed  at 
every  step  by  the  survival  of  this  Pagan  ideal ;  and 
that,  finally,  the  gorgeous  Sacrificial  System  itself 
came  into  existence  as  a  recrudescence  of  a  creed 
outworn.  So  far,  then,  from  being  the  "  ante-type  " 
of  Christian  worship,  it  seems  to  have  been  but  a 
pseudo  development  which  perished  of  its  own  faulti- 
ness.  Jesus  was  "  priest  of  the  order  of  Melchisedek 
which  is  king  of  peace."  Moses  and  the  Prophets,  not 
Aaron  and  the  Prophets,  are  in  the  line  of  His  ascent. 
Again,  the  generation  which  has  thus  come  into  the 
truth  in  the  study  of  Anthropology  and  Biblican  Crit- 
icism is  the  same  one  which  has  displaj^ed  an  alto- 
gether  unique   solicitude   to   discover    the   secret   of 


244  THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   CROSS 

Jesus'  power  and  to  translate  His  spirit  into  actual 
life.  It  is  most  significant  that  the  interest  of  the 
Christian  world  has  turned  away  from  the  study  of 
formal  Theology  to  the  study  of  the  Life  of  Christ. 
It  seems  to  be  becoming  convinced  that  a  false  start 
has  been  made  long  ago,  and  seeks  to  regain  that 
place  where  the  paths  diverge  in  order  to  follow  the 
true  one  under  the  guidance  of  Jesus.  The  religious 
thought  of  our  time  is  determined  to  find  its  way  back 
past  the  Tridentine  or  Reformation  System,  past  the 
medieval  traditions,  past  the  Catholic  Creeds,  refuses 
to  pause  with  Paul,  clamors  for  the  very  words  of  the 
Master.  It  "  would  see  Jesus."  The  names  most 
widely  known  in  the  Christian  world  of  this  age 
whether  among  scholars  or  people  are,  Strauss,  Bauer, 
Keim,  Edersheim,  Farrar,  Stalker,  Drummond,  Bruce, 
Brooks.  And  all  for  the  same  reason.  They  intro- 
duce their  readers  directly  to  Christ.  They  have  the 
zeal  of  a  first  quest.  If  Christendom  really  believed 
that  it  had  already  in  possession  His  secret  this  interest 
could  not  be  awakened.  The  most  epoch  making 
book  in  the  religious  world  for  centuries  is  Ecce  Homo. 
Every  fresh  attempt  to  learn  Christ's  secret  is  inspired 
really  by  the  deep  conviction  that  for  some  reason  and 
in  some  way  it  has  been  lost  or  overlooked.  Can  it 
be  true  that  this  is  the  situation  ? 

It  is  certainly  the  fact  that  each  denomination  of 
Christians  believes  that  every  other  one  has  in  some 
way  missed  the  Truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus.     The  Catholic 


THE    DOCTKINE    OF   THE    CROSS  245 

believes  this  of  the  Protestant.  The  Protestant 
believes  this  of  the  Anglican ;  the  Anglican  believes 
this  of  both  ;  and  the  Oriental  believes  this  of  all. 
May  it  be  that  what  they  all  believe  is  true  ?  Does 
not  the  very  existence  of  the  belief  vindicate  its  cor- 
rectness ?  While  they  all  agree  substantially  upon 
the  facts  of  Jesus'  career  and  receive  the  same  record 
of  His  word,  they  disagree  utterly  upon  the  true 
significance  of  these  deeds  and  the  interpretation  of 
these  words.  What  will  account  for  these  disagree- 
ments but  the  theory  that  they  have  all  alike  misin- 
terpreted Him  ?  And  if  this  be  true,  or  if  it  be  only 
partially  true,  what  remains  to  be  done  but  to  go  back 
to  the  beginning  and  start  afresh  ?  This  may  be  a 
humiliating  thing  to  do.  For  great  multitudes  of 
Christians  it  may  be  an  impossible  thing  to  do. 
Nevertheless,  it  would  seem  that  we  have  come  to  the 
place  where  no  other  course  is  open. 

When  we  come  to  see  that  the  whole  nexus  of  sac- 
rificial ideas  are  but  the  survival  of  Paganism,  and 
Judaism,  that  its  underlying  idea  is  false  and  immoral, 
unworthy  of  man  and  untrue  of  God  ;  when  we  see 
that  the  Sacrificial  System  was  an  intrusion  into  the 
course  of  Hebrew  development  and  an  obstacle  to  its 
natural  movement ;  when  we  see  that  the  Prophets 
denounced  it  as  paltry  and  hurtful ;  when  we  see  that 
Jesus  held  aloof  both  from  its  facts  and  its  phrases ; 
when  we  see  how  and  when  and  why  it  fastened  itself 
upon  the  Christian  Society,  surel}^  we  must  be  ready 


246  THE    DOCTRINE   OP   THE   CROSS 

to  abandon  it,  and  to  seek  some  truer  rationale  of  the 
burdened  life  and  painful  death  of  Christ.  It  may  be 
as  well  to  confess  that  the  task  will  not  be  an  easy 
one.  For  in  Epistles  and  Missals,  in  Liturgies  and  Con- 
fessions and  Summse,  the  substitutionary  idea  holds  the 
field.  They  all  reek  of  blood  !  They  all  conceive  of 
salvation  as  a  commercial  transaction.  It  is  a  com- 
modity bought  with  a  price.  But  then,  Jesus'  real 
doctrine  of  the  Cross  is  also  entangled  with  them  all. 
This  has  given  them  their  viability.  The  task  now  is, 
in  a  word,  to  disentangle  the  Cross  from  the  Altar. 

What,  then,  is  Christ's  Doctrine  of  the  Cross  ?  It 
cannot  be  more  simply  stated  than  in  His  own  phrase ; 
— "  If  any  man  is  willing  to  come  after  Me,  let  him 
take  his  cross  and  follow  Me ;  for  whosoever  would 
save  his  life  shall  lose  it,  and  whosoever  is  willing  to 
lose  his  life  shall  find  it."  All  His  words  are  but  the 
expansion  of  this  which  He  announces  as  an  eternal 
truth.  It  is  true,  He  says,  of  Himself,  of  men,  and  of 
God.  The  starting-point  of  His  doctrine  is  the  fact  of 
pain  and  evil  in  the  world.  Heretofore,  He  says,  when 
men  have  tried  to  resist  evil,  they  have  tried  to  beat  it 
back  as  they  would  repel  a  hostile  foe,  by  force.  Re- 
sist not  evil.  To  attempt  escape  from  it  by  resistance 
is  as  futile  as  to  try  to  cure  a  burn  by  applying  fire. 
His  Sermon  on  the  Mount  is  His  Pronunciamento. 
Let  evil  break  itself  against  you ;  do  not  break  your- 
self against  it,  is  His  secret.  And  this  whether  evil  as- 
sails in  the  form  of  pain  or  of  wrong.     If  it  be  pain, 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   CROSS  247 

turn  upon  it  with  love  for  God,  and  its  sting  is  gone. 
If  it  be  wrong,  turn  upon  it  with  love  for  men,  and 
the   wrongdoer   will    be   disarmed.     Says   Mr.    John 

Fiske, 

"  In  the  cruel  strife  of  centuries  has  it  not  often 
seemed  as  if  the  earth  were  the  prize  of  the  hardest 
hearts  and  the  strongest  fist?  To  many  men  the 
words  of  Christ  have  been  as  foolishness  and  a 
stumbling-block,  and  the  Ethics  of  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  have  been  openly  derided  as  too  good  for  this 
world.  In  that  wonderful  picture  of  modern  life 
which  is  the  greatest  work  of  one  of  the  greatest  seers 
of  our  time,  Victor  Hugo  gives  a  concrete  illustration 
of  the  working  of  Christ's  method.  In  the  saint-like 
career  of  Bishop  Myriel,  and  in  the  transformation  of 
his  life-work  in  the  character  of  the  hardened  outlaw, 
Jean  Valjean,  we  have  a  most  valuable  commentary 
upon  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  By  some  critics  who 
would  express  their  views  freely  about  Les  Miserables, 
while  hesitating  to  impugn  directly  the  authority  of 
the  New  Testament,  Monseigneur  Bienvennu  was 
unsparingly  ridiculed  as  a  man  of  impossible  goodness, 
and  a  milksop  and  fool  withal.  But  I  think  Victor 
Hugo  understood  the  capabilities  of  human  nature  and 
its  real  dignity  better  than  these  scoffers.  In  a  low 
state  of  civilization  Monseigneur  Bienvennu  would 
have  had  small  chance  of  reaching  middle  life.  Christ 
Himself,  we  remember,  was  crucified  between  two 
thieves.  It  is  none  the  less  true  that  when  once  the 
degree  of  civilization  is  such  as  to  allow  tliis  highest 
type  of  character,  distinguished  by  its  meekness  and 
kindness  to  take  root  and  thrive,  its  methods  are  in- 
comparable in  their  potency.  Tiie  Master  knew  full 
well  that  the  time  was  not  ripe,  that  He  brought  not 
peace  but  a  sword.  But  He  preached,  nevertheless, 
that  gospel  of  great  joy  which  is  by  and  by  to  be 
realized  by  toiling  humanity,  and  He  announced  ethical 
principles   good    for   the    time   that  is  coming.     The 


248  THE   DOCTEINE   OF   THE   CROSS 

great  originality  of  His  teaching,  and  the  feature 
which  has  given  it  its  hold  upon  men,  lay  in  the  dis- 
tinctness with  which  He  conceived  a  state  of  society 
from  which  every  vestige  of  strife,  and  the  behavior 
adapted  to  ages  of  strife,  shall  be  forever  and  utterly 
swept  away.  Through  misery  which  has  seemed  un- 
endurable, and  toil  that  has  seemed  endless,  men  have 
thought  on  that  gracious  life  and  its  sublime  ideal,  and 
have  taken  comfort  in  the  sweetly  solemn  message  of 
peace  on  earth  and  good  will  to  men." 

All  this  is  true  and  admirable ;  but  much  more  is  true. 
Jesus  announced  His  ideal  of  life,  not  at  all  as  the 
practical  solution  which  a  wise  man  might  give  to  the 
problem  of  conduct.  He  announced  it  as  the  very 
"Word  of  God.  He  declares  that  light  and  life  and 
wisdom  are  the  fruit  of  love ;  and  this  because  God 
has  made  things  so,  and  because  He  is  so  Himself. 
"  If  ye  believe  in  Me,  keep  My  commandments.  I 
have  but  one  commandment : — thou  shalt  love  the 
Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart  and  soul  and  mind, 
and  thy  neighbor  as  thyself."  To  obey  this  com- 
mandment is  equivalent  to  taking  up  the  Cross. 
Love,  the  Cross,  and  Life,  are  the  motive,  the  means, 
and  the  end  of  existence  for  all  who  share  the  nature 
of  God.  Whether  it  be  in  the  person  of  Jesus  Christ 
against  whom  Hebrew  malignity  wrecked  itself,  and 
became  forever  after  impotent ;  or  Stephen  against 
whom  Pharisaic  hate  destroyed  itself;  or  Poly  carp 
whose  love  quenched  provincial  rage ;  or  Telemachus 
against  whom  luxurious  cruelty  broke  itself  ;  or  of 
that   innumerable   multitude   out  of  every  tribe  and 


THE    DOCTEIlSrE    OF   THE    CROSS  249 

tongue  and  kindred  under  heaven  who  by  patient 
continuance  in  well  doinir  have  won  their  enemies,  bv 
these  and  by  their  method  have  been  won  the  only 
permanent  triumpli  so  far  gained. 

The  Cross  of  Christ  is  not  an  isolated  monument  ris- 
ing out  of  the  confused  and  purposeless  waves  of  life's 
ocean  whereto  shipwrecked  mariners  may  cling  for 
refuge.  It  is  the  sailing  directions  by  which  the 
voyager  guides  his  craft  throughout  his  whole  course. 
Not  they  who  "  look  only  to  the  Cross  for  salvation," 
but  they  who  "  take  up  the  Cross  and  follow  Him  " 
are  Christians.  The  first  is  a  mercenary  sentiment 
which  defeats  itself;  the  second  is  the  divine  mode  of 
life  for  men.  He  that  saveth  his  own  life,  shall  lose 
it ;  and  he  that  loseth  his  life  for  My  sake  and  the 
gospel's  shall  save  it." 

For  the  gospel's  sake.  This  was  His  motive.  For 
its  sake  He  laid  down  His  life.  He  declared  that  His 
laying  it  down  was  an  act  of  deliberate  choice.  "  I 
have  power  to  lay  it  down,  and  I  have  power  to  take 
it  up  again."  It  is  an  area  where  no  compulsion  can 
operate.  Every  man  has  the  same  power  to  lay  down 
his  life,  and  if  he  repent  the  determination  when  he 
begins  to  feel  the  cost,  to  take  it  up  again.  Jesus  laid 
down  His  life  before  the  world's  evil  for  it  to  work  its 
will  upon.  He  steadfastly  refused  to  save  it  by  taking 
it  out  of  the  way  of  the  world's  evil.  It  was  easy  to 
see  what  the  immediate  result  would  be.  "  He  must 
go   to   Jerusalem,    and  suffer   many    things,    and  be 


250  THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   CROSS 

killed."  Of  course  He  must.  He  bad  started  upon  a 
"Way  which  led  there  naturally.  He  must  follow  it  to 
the  end,  or  else  abandon  it  and  turn  back.  The  com- 
pulsion is  always  from  within.  The  hard  and  unrea- 
sonable conditions  of  life  may  hold  the  witless  rustic 
Simon  the  Cyrenian  and  compel  him  to  bear  a  cross. 
But  such  a  misfortune  is  an  isolated  incident  without 
spiritual  consequences.  Jesus'  Doctrine  of  the  Cross 
is  this  : — God  suffers  because  God  is  Love :  men  are 
the  sons  of  God,  inheriting  His  nature ;  they  come 
into  their  inheritance  and  become  masters  of  life  only 
through  Love ;  and  the  Cross  is  the  necessity  of  Love. 

And  so,  He  suffered  under  Pontius  Pilate,  was 
crucified,  died,  and  was  buried. 

We  have  seen  above  that  Jesus'  Way  led  Him  into 
the  possession  of  a  more  abundant  and  potent  life 
than  any  other  has  shown.  This  brought  Him  into 
relation  with  the  physical  environment  of  life.  The 
fountain  of  living  flowed  so  abundantly  in  Him  that 
it  was  at  least  once  able  to  pour  itself  over  "the 
wheel  broken  at  the  cistern  "  in  the  body  of  his  dead 
friend  Lazarus,  and  set  it  moving  again.  It  flowed  so 
purely  that  it  was  able  to  distil  clean  blood  into 
leprous  veins.  When  "  virtue  went  out  of  him "  it 
staunched  the  unclean  wasting  of  an  inform  woman's 
life ;  lifted  the  paralytic  who  could  by  no  means  raise 
himself  up  ;  clarified  the  thick  humors  of  the  blind ; 
brought  vigor  to  the  distorted  legs  of  the  cripple; 
woke  the  little  maid  from  the  sleep  of  syncope  into 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   CROSS  251 

the  fresh  joy  of  living.  And,  in  a  measure,  His  dis- 
ciples did  the  like.  They  all  did  it  by  touch,  by  im- 
partation,  by  contagion.  Was  this  "  Natural "  ?  or 
"  Supernatural "  ?  I  reply,  the  antithesis  is  not  legiti- 
mate. He  assumes  that  these  and  greater  works  than 
these  were  natural  to  men  of  their  sort.  They  but 
acted  in  character.  His  "  Disciples  "  were  men  who 
by  following  Him  had  also  become  partially  conscious 
of  like  endowments.  These  powers,  He  declared,  be- 
long to  the  real  nature  of  man.  They  are  unsus- 
pected, latent,  to  all  practical  purposes  non-existent  in 
the  ordinary  man.  They  are  awakened  into  con- 
sciousness and  quickened  into  potency  by  moral 
processes.  He  calls  this  moral  process  Faith,  and 
refers  to  it  as  His  "  Way."  "  Oh  !  ye  of  little  faith," 
He  cries  to  them  when  they  stand  helpless  in  the 
presence  of  the  epileptic  whose  father  begged  for 
cure.  "These  signs  shall  follow  them  that  believe, 
they  shall  cast  out  devils,  they  shall  speak  with  new 
tongues,  they  shall  take  up  serpents,  if  they  drink  any 
deadly  thing  it  shall  not  hurt  them,  they  shall  lay 
hands  on  the  sick  and  they  shall  recover."  That  is  to 
say,  the  new  type  of  man  whom  he  reveals  and  who 
is  produced  from  the  ordinary  type  by  His  Way  shall 
be,  to  such  extent  as  He  pursue  that  Way,  freed  from 
certain  physical  limitations,  and  possessed  of  physical 
potencies  quite  unique.  They  will  have  life  and  have 
it  more  abundantly.  This  life  will  naturally  safe- 
guard its  possessor  against  many  ills,  and  he  will  be 


252  THE  DOCTRINE   OF   THE   CROSS 

able  to  share  his  abundance — at  a  cost  to  himself — 
with  the  needy.  He  does  not  intimate  that  they  will 
be  freed  from  the  constant  laws  of  growth,  decay  and 
dissolution.  But  that  by  becoming  preeminently 
humane  they  will  be  able  to  resist  such  evils  as  flesh 
is  not  heir  to  but  stands  exposed  to  while  it  starves 
outside  its  legitimate  inheritance.  He  says  to  the 
sick  of  the  palsy,  "  Thy  sins  be  forgiven  thee."  He 
associates  physical  disease  with  moral  lesion.  Moral 
purity  is,  to  His  mind,  the  prophylactic  against  dis- 
ease. It  is  also  the  mx  medicatrix.  According  to 
the  record,  those  nearest  to  Him,  and  while  they  were 
sustained  in  their  moral  exaltation  by  His  presence 
and  contagion,  found  themselves  possessed  of  strange 
powers,  to  their  exceeding  great  amazement.  "  Lord, 
even  the  devils  are  subject  to  us,"  they  report  upon 
their  return  from  an  excursion.  The  same  "  signs  " 
showed  themselves  in  a  few  after  he  passed  away. 
But  they  became  more  and  more  infrequent,  and 
finally  passed  away  as  the  Christians  declined  from 
their  high  moral  exaltation  and  Christianity  became  a 
"  Eeligion  "  instead  of  a  new  power  of  living.  Their 
places  came  to  be  occupied  by  the  fantastic  "  miracles  " 
of  the  middle  ages.  When  the  Church  as  an  organiza- 
tion fell  away  from  His  AVay  its  members  began  to 
lack  His  Life.  It  took  up  the  sword  instead,  and  all 
unconsciously  committed  spiritual  suicide. 

But  for  one  who  held  steadfastly  to  His  Way  of  the 
Cross  the  issue  was  Life,  a  life  which  physical  dissolu- 


THE   DOCTRINE    OF    THE    CROSS  253 

tion  was  powerless  to  touch.  Therefore,  He  rose 
again  from  the  dead.  To  such  an  one  death  is  an 
incident,  an  episode.  He  has  anticipated  it.  The 
life  which  was  in  Him  had  been  strong  enough  to 
build  up  for  itself  a  spiritual  body,  organized  in  ad- 
Vance  in  sufficient  stability  to  survive  the  shock  of 
physical  dissolution.  The  life  had  become  the  seed 
from  which  springs  the  new  body.  The  body  is 
not  that  body  which  shall  be  but  some  other  and 
"God  giveth  to  every  seed  its  proper  body."  So 
Jesus  reappeared  in  a  body ;  in  His  own  body ;  in  the 
body  which  belonged  to  Him  in  that  stage  and  progress 
of  Life.  From  the  record  it  is  plain  that  it  both  was 
and  was  not  "  that  body  which  had  been."  Physical 
identification  is  only  possible  where  physical  tests  can 
be  applied.  In  the  nature  of  the  case  the  laws  of 
matter,  as  we  know  matter,  are  not  available  here. 
It  is  conceivable,  and  indeed  likely,  that  the  distinc- 
tion of  "  material "  and  "  spiritual "  which  Ave  make 
between  the  life  which  now  is  and  that  which  is  to 
come,  is  an  unwarranted  one.  Probably  they  are 
both  conditioned  by  matter.  Many  things  indicate 
that  we  are  on  the  brink  of  discoveries  in  matter 
which  will  compel  a  readjustment  of  all  our  defini- 
tions.^ But  at  all  events,  no  question  of  material 
identity  as  we  now  conceive  of  matter  has  any  place 
in  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection.  Jesus'  career  is 
consistent    throughout.     By    the    perfection    of    His 

"  Dolbear  ;  Matter,  Ether  and  Motion. 


254  THE   DOCTKIISrE   OF   THE   CROSS 

humanity  He  became  conscious  that  He  was  the  Son 
of  God.  By  taking  up  God's  manner  of  life  in  His 
person  of  a  man  He  found  the  Cross  upon  Him  as 
upon  the  Father.  By  walking  steadfastly  in  the  Way 
of  the  Cross  He  found  Himself  filled  with  an  inex- 
pugnable Life.  By  the  power  of  the  life  which  was 
in  Him  He  passed  through  the  shock  of  dissolution 
undisturbed.  Being  then  free  from  the  conditions  of 
material  existence  He  moved  without  let  or  hinder- 
ance  alike  into  hell  and  into  heaven.  In  all  alike  He 
was  a  Son  of  Man  and  a  Son  of  God,  and  manifested 
the  inherent  nature  and  capabilities  of  both. 


THE  OTHER  LIFE 


XV 

THE   OTHER    LIFE 

It  would  hardly  be  too  much  to  say  that  belief  in  a 
future  life  came  into  human  thought  as  a  result  of  the 
career  of  Jesus.  While  it  is  true  that  a  vague,  form- 
less, phantasmal  notion  of  the  persistence  of  the  indi- 
vidual after  death  did  obtain  in  places  before  him,  and 
has  been  entertained  beyond  his  sphere  of  influence, 
still  it  is  true  historically  that  the  belief  in  a  future 
life  owes  all  its  clearness,  form,  and  practical  effi- 
ciency to  the  contribution  which  he  made  to  it. 
Before  him  the  belief,  where  it  amounted  to  a  belief, 
was  practically  inoperative  on  account  of  its  vague- 
ness. In  the  Homeric  poems,  for  example,  the  ghosts 
of  the  departed  were  thought  of  as  thin  shadows  of 
their  former  selves,  shivering  in  the  twilight  of  the 
Underworld.  Even  Achilles,  to  whom  is  assigned 
the  kingship  among  the  shades,  is  represented  as 
declaring  that  he  would  "  rather  be  the  meanest  slave 
on  earth."  When  Virgil  depicts  the  condition  of  the 
shade  of  Anchises,  his  picture  is  indeed  more  definite 
than  that  drawn  by  Homer,  but  it  is  doubtful  if  its 
very  distinctness  does  not  introduce  a  grotesque  ele- 
ment which  makes  it  all  the  more  difficult  to  receive. 
The  immortal  dialogue  in  the  Phsedo  shows  Socrates 

257 


258  THE    OTHER   LIFE 

and  his  friends  groping  in  the  same  vague  shadow. 
In  the  master's  mind  was  alternately  "  faith  crossed 
by  doubt  and  doubt  crossed  by  faith."  His  abstract 
argument  for  immortality  seems  conclusive  enough 
qua  argument,  but  it  eludes  all  attempt  to  picture 
before  the  imagination  the  concept  with  which  the 
argument  is  concerned.  The  same  helplessness  marks 
the  thought  of  future  life  in  those  places  where  it 
appears  in  the  Old  Testament.  It  may  be  said  with- 
out much  fear  of  successful  contradiction  that  no 
appeal  is  ever  taken  in  the  Old  Testament  from  the 
life  which  now  is  to  that  which  is  to  come.  No  possi- 
bility of  either  bliss  or  calamity  there  is  ever  urged  as 
a  motive  to  modify  conduct  here.  And  this,  notwith- 
standing that  a  vague  belief  in  the  fact  of  a  continued 
existence  beyond  the  grave  was  widely  entertained. 
The  reason  is  plain.  The  belief  lacked  form.  The 
question,  "  with  what  body  do  they  come  ?  "  remained 
unanswered.  Lacking  an  answer  to  this  the  belief  in 
"  immortality  "  remained  an  inoperative  fancy.  The 
transcendent  influence  of  Jesus  here  is  owing  to  the 
fact  that  He  has  supplied  a  thinkable  form  for  what 
was  before  an  elusive  even  though  persistent  instinct. 
It  is  well  to  learn  once  for  all  that  no  conscious 
being  can  exist,  or  be  conceived  of  as  existing,  except 
as  such  a  being  express  itself  in  terms  of  matter.  For 
consciousness  is  not  possible  to  any  subject  except  as 
such  personality  is  reflected  back  upon  itself  from 
something  different  in  kind  from  itself.     That  from 


THE    OTHER    LIFE  259 

which  alone  such  reaction  can  come  to  Spirit  is  Matter. 
In  each  personality  the  spirit  asserts  its  being  in  self- 
consciousness,  but  this  consciousness  of  self  is  simply 
the  expression  in  terms  of  spirit  of  the  constant  law 
that  action  and  reaction  are  equal  and  in  opposite 
directions.  The  spirit  can  only  arouse  consciousness 
of  self  by  pressing  against  something  which  is  not 
spirit.  It  acts  outwardly  from  its  own  centre,  and  the 
reaction  is  consciousness.  The  spirit  can  only  be 
aware  of  itself  in  its  successive  moments  through  the 
medium  of  a  body.^  Jesus  has  made  the  belief  in 
immortality  available  by  giving  it  a  body.  This 
opens  the  question  "  How  are  the  dead  raised  up,  and 
with  what  body  do  they  come  ?  "  There  has  been  a 
strange  hesitation  in  accepting  the  answer  which  St. 
Paul  gives  to  the  question.  His  reply  is,  substantially, 
firsts  that  the  body  that  shall  be  is  not  materially 
identical  with  the  body  Avhich  now  is  ;  and 

Second,  that  there  is  provision  in  the  universe  to 
furnish  forth  the  spirits  which  live  with  bodies  com- 
posed of  matter  spiritual.^    "With  the  first  of    these 

'  If  it  be  objected  that  this  reasoning  implies  the  eternity  of  the 
physical  universe  as  the  condition  of  God's  self-consciousness,  it  is 
sufBcieut  to  reply  that  so  far  as  our  capacities  of  thought  are  con- 
cerned this  is  true.  "Whether  it  be  true  "absolutely"  or  not,  one 
cannot  either  affirm  or  deny,  for  he  cannot  formulate  to  himself  the 
alternative  proposition.  One  cannot  think  of  God  without  having 
in  his  mind  the  material  universe  as  a  background  against  which 
he  sets  the  concept  of  God.  If  any  one  doubt  this,  let  him  make 
the  experiment. 

«  1  Cor.  XV.  35-50. 


260  THE    OTHER    LIFE 

statements  the  modern  world  is  in  hearty  agreement. 
It  is  so  evident  that  "  flesh  and  blood  cannot  inherit 
the  kingdom  of  God,"  that  the  world  of  to-day  will 
sooner  throw  away  all  belief  in  a  future  existence 
than  entertain  the  crude  notion  of  a  physical  resur- 
rection. The  qualities  of  the  human  body  have  come 
to  be  well  understood,  and  it  is  seen  that  immortality 
is  not  only  not  one  of  them,  but  that  it  is  something 
which  cannot  be  impressed  upon  it. 

The  beliefs  concerning  the  future  of  death  which 
have  long  held  the  field  are  three.  Either  men  have 
tried  to  think  of  disembodied  spirits  as  passing  on  and 
enduring ;  (Plato,  Augustine,  Spinoza,  Fiske,)  oi\  they 
have  thought  that  the  spirit  and  the  body  break  up  to- 
gether and  go  out  together  into  chaos ;  (Moleschott, 
Yirchow,  Heackel,  Burmeister,  Darwin,)  or,  they  have 
thought  of  the  material  body  being  regathered  after 
disintegration  and  endowed  with  immortality,  (Cur- 
rent, so-called  "  Orthodoxy  ").  This  last  has  come  to  be 
the  belief  of  the  great  mass  of  Catholics  ;  probably 
also  that  of  the  rank  and  file  of  Protestants.  A  little 
steady  reflection  will  show  that  none  of  them  can  be 
the  truth.  To  consider  them  in  their  order,  a  "  disem- 
bodied spirit  "  is  simply  an  \ix^\\\\x\^?C<A^  jpseudo-concept. 
And  again,  the  quality  of  immortality  cannot  be  pre- 
dicted of  a  physical  body.  And  finally,  to  think  of  the 
personality  ceasing  with  the  dissolution  of  the  body  is  to 
conceive  so  palpable  a  violation  of  the  constant  law  of 
the  persistence  of  force  that  it  is  becoming  increasingly 


THE    OTHEE   LIFE  261 

hard  to  believe  it.  One  can  see  what  the  physical  en- 
ergies of  a  man  are,  or  at  least,  how  they  act  and  into 
what  they  are  transformed  when  death  intervenes. 
They  can  be  weighed,  traced,  accounted  for  in  terms 
of  physics.  But  the  psychic  energy  Avhich  has  been 
implicated  with  them  demands  equally  honorable  treat- 
ment. If  that  energy  be  quenched  it  must  needs  be 
by  a  force  which  is  akin  to  it.  When  it  disappears  its 
exit  must  be  accounted  for  in  terms  of  some  equiv- 
alence. It  is  difficult  to  think  that  the  psychic  energy 
which  has  taken  to  itself  a  natural  vesture  moulded  to 
its  uses,  and  renewed  so  many  times  in  the  course  of 
life,  will  suddenly  find  itself  shivering  in  naked  im- 
potence to  clothe  itself  and  perish  for  want  of  a  gar- 
ment. It  is  easier  to  believe,  in  the  abstract,  that 
there  is  a  spiritual  body  as  there  is  a  natural  body ; 
and  that  as  we  have  borne  the  image  of  the  earthly 
we  shall  also  bear  the  image  of  the  heavenly.  The 
difficulty  all  along  has  been  to  conceive  of  a  body  fit- 
ted for  the  next  stage  of  the  soul's  existence.  There 
are  many  indications  that  physical  science  itself  is 
about  to  bring  relief  to  our  thought. 

One  of  the  results  of  the  modern  study  of  Physics 
is  that  it  has  compelled  us  to  reopen  our  accepted  def- 
initions of  Matter.  It  is  being  found  not  to  be  the 
"  gross  stuff  "  which  Plato  miscalled  it.  The  studies 
of  Lord  Kelvin,  Hemlholtz,  Langley,  Dolbear,  and 
Tesla  and  a  host  of  others  have  transformed  our 
conception  of   the   material   universe.     There   is  the 


262  THE    OTHER    LIFE 

matter  which  we  see,  feel,  touch,  weigh,  of  which  our 
senses  take  cognizance ;  and  there  is  also  the  ethereal 
matter  with  which  all  space  is  filled,  with  which  our 
world  is  interpenetrated,  which  obeys  laws  of  its  own, 
and  which  mocks  at  the  limitations  of  our  physical 
laws.  For  an  instance,  let  one  reflect  what  happens 
when  light  passes  through  a  block  of  glass.  Light  is 
a  specific  form  of  undulation  in  a  material  medium. 
The  waves  start  from  the  sun  millions  of  miles  away, 
chase  one  another  through  what  we  mistakenly  have 
called  "  empty  space,"  and  sweep  through  the  mass  of 
glass,  one  of  the  densest  forms  of  matter,  as  water 
flows  through  a  sieve.  The  waves  are  propagated 
through  a  material  medium.  The  ether  which  trans- 
mits them,  and  which  transmits  another  wave  form 
called  magnetism,  and  still  another  called  heat,  is  at 
once  dense  and  tenuous,  potent  and  subtile.  Matter  it 
is,  demonstrably,  but  matter  of  a  sort  which  defies  all 
our  definitions.  But  it  is  clearly  stuff  of  such  a  char- 
acter that  if  by  any  means  a  body  might  be  fashioned 
of  it  for  a  human  spirit,  such  an  embodied  and  con- 
scious personality,  while  still  in  the  sphere  of  Nature, 
would  be  in  a  region  which,  as  related  to  the  one  in 
which  we  move,  might  fairly  be  called  supernatural. 
It  would  not  be  unclothed  but  clothed  upon.  A  new 
mode  of  existence  would  be  opened  up  to  such  a  per- 
son. It  would  be  a  materially  conditioned  existence 
of  course,  but  as  we  have  seen,  no  other  mode  of  ex- 
istence is  conceivable. 


THE    OTHER    LIFE  263 

There  is  a  strange  tendency  to  miss  what  is  the  real 
question  at  stake  in  all  our  discussion  concerning  a 
future  life.  It  is  not  the  question  of  absolute  immor- 
tality. Absolute  immortality  can  never  be  predicted 
of  anything  but  God  the  Absolute.  The  simple  prob- 
lem before  us  is  to  find  some  bridge  by  which  to  pass 
from  the  life  that  now  is  to  a  succeeding  one.  That 
one  may  not,  and  by  all  analogy  will  not,  be  endless 
or  indefeasible.  The  question  of  its  duration  and  of 
its  conditions  will  arise  only  for  those  who  are  in  it  if 
any  such  there  can  be.  But  at  present  one  can  only 
feel  like  a  man  crossing  a  quaking  bog,  his  only  task 
being  to  find  a  new  standing  ground  as  he  feels  sink- 
ing under  him  the  last  tussock  in  sight. 

The  possibility  to  survive  the  shock  of  physical  dis- 
solution and  to  move  on  in  a  continuous  existence  is 
spoken  of  in  the  New  Testament  as  Life.  It  is  de- 
scribed as  "eternal,"  with  reference  not  to  its  duration 
but  to  its  quality.  It  is  not  conceived  of  as  the  com- 
mon and  natural  element  of  all  men,  but  as  something 
which  is  to  be  striven  for  strenuously,  and  which  may 
be  attained,  or  may  not,  as  the  case  may  be. 

The  notion  that  every  human  being  is  compounded 
of  a  "  body  "  which  is  perishable  and  a  "  soul "  which 
is  intrinsically  immortal,  is  a  Pagan  idea  which  finds 
no  shadow  of  support  in  the  Christian  Scriptures. 
They  speak  of  eternal  life  not  as  an  endowment  but  an 
achievement.  Jesus  reiterates  this  (Matt.  xvi.  25 ; 
John  xi.  25,  iii.  15,  v.  24,  iii.  5-7,  etc.,  etc.,  etc.).     St. 


264  THE    OTHER   LIFE 

Paul  explicitly  asserts  his  own  uncertainty  as  to  his 
own  immortality,  and  prays  "  that  by  any  means  he 
might  attain  to  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  not  as 
though  he  had  already  attained."  (Phil.  iii.  11.)  The 
problem  is  then  to  find  a  physical  basis  for  the  spirits' 
life  beyond  that  point  where  matter,  as  we  usually 
conceive  of  it,  becomes  no  longer  available,  and  to  as- 
certain what  is  the  nexus  between  the  spirit  and  such 
a  body.  It  is  indeed  only  the  question  of  the  revela- 
tion of  mind  and  matter  carried  one  stage  farther  than 
the  one  in  which  we  now  live.  The  general  principle 
to  be  used  in  its  solution  is  the  dictum  of  St.  Paul  that 
"  God  giveth  to  every  seed  its  proper  body." 

The  spirit  is  the  Seed.  His  contention  is  that  the 
strange  potency  of  the  seed  to  take  to  itself  fitting 
matter  in  which  to  express  itself  is  a  potency  which  is 
constant  and  perdures  in  every  region  Avhere  life 
exists.  As  there  is  one  kind  of  flesh  of  beasts  and  an- 
other of  man,  so  there  are  bodies  terrestrial  and  bodies 
celestial.  That  is  to  say,  as  each  form  of  life  in  the 
ascending  scale  through  the  fishes,  the  birds,  the 
mammal  and  the  man  "  finds  itself  "  in  a  body  of  fit- 
ting matter,  so,  the  same  law  is  continued  onward 
into  the  next  ethereal  stage.  Conscious  existence  is 
everywhere  conditioned  upon  matter.  The  soul  must 
have  a  body,  else  it  ceases  to  be  a  soul.  The  human 
spirit  in  building  up  for  itself  a  physical  body  uses 
something,  more  or  less,  of  every  element.  The  body 
of  man  is  the  epitome  and  recapitulation  of  the  ma- 


THE    OTHEK   LIFE  265 

terial  universo  as  the  soul  is  of  all  orders  of  all  ante- 
cedent forms  of  life.     As  the  body  is  closely  com- 
pacted together  in  the  womb  it  passes  stage  by  stage, 
through   every  step   of   past  cosmical  history.     The 
man  is  the  microcosm  of  the  life  and  the  matter  thus 
far  developed.     He  attains  his  development  by  proc- 
esses  of    which   he   himself    is   largely   unconscious. 
That  is,  where  he  attains  at  all  to  the  measure  of  the 
stature  of  a  perfect  man.     But  long  before  this  proc- 
ess  reaches   completion,  it  would   seem  that  a   new 
process  may  set  in  which  has  its  issue  in  a  life  which 
in  common  speech  is  called  Eternal.     "  Are  there  few 
then  that  be  saved  ?  "     It  would  seem  so,  both  by  the 
analogy  of  Nature  and  by  the  words  of  Jesus.     "  For 
strait  is  the  gate  and  narrow  the  way  that  leadeth  unto 
Life  and  few  there  be  that  find  it ;  for  wide  is  the  gate 
and  broad  is  the  way  that  leadeth  to  destruction,  and 
many  there  be  that  go  out  thereat."     Life  climbs  up 
slowly  through  its  ascending  orders  until  self-conscious, 
moral  beings  such  as  man  is  reached.    When  these  pass 
the  purely  animal  stage  so  far  as  to  be  morally  self- 
conscious,  each  one  becomes  capable  of  beginning  the 
process  of  building  up  for  itself  a  body  of  such  stuflf  as 
will  abide.     Jesus  brings  life  and  immortality  to  light 
by  pointing  out  the  condition  upon  which  perduring  life 
depends;   and  by  displaying  in  His  own  person  an 
actual  instance  of  such  a  life.     According  to  Him  it 
is   contingent  upon  Moral   conditions.     He  endorses 
that    human    instinct   which   has   always   associated 


266  THE   OTHER    LIFE 

eternal  life  with  goodness  and  eternal  destruction 
with  moral  badness.  He  points  out  that  this  is  true 
for  a  reason  so  simple  that  it  has  seemed  incredible. 
Sin,  in  its  last  analysis  is  suicide.  It  is  living  to  the 
present  environment  at  the  expense  of  the  next  one. 
It  is  an  arrest  of  development  which  is  punished  with 
degradation.  All  those  actions  which  men  agree  to 
call  morally  evil  may  be  reduced  to  two,  which  are 
essentially  one.  They  are  either  Lust  or  Murder. 
All  those  multiform  immoralities  which  revolve  about 
the  fact  of  sex  are  forms  of  the  attempt  to  express  the 
sense  of  living  in  the  terms  of  flesh,  "For  lust, 
when  it  hath  conceived  bringeth  forth  sin,  and  sin 
when  it  is  finished  issues  in  death."  It  does  so  be- 
cause it  withdraws  the  vital  energy  which  would  else 
be  employed  in  building  up  the  spiritual  body,  and  dis- 
sipates it  upon  that  form  of  matter  which  is  in  its  na- 
ture capable  of  but  transiently  expressing  the  life  of 
the  spirit.  On  the  other  hand,  all  those  forms  of 
wrong  which  are  called  by  such  names  as  covetous- 
ness,  dishonesty,  hate  and  theft,  are  but  rudimentary 
forms  of  murder.  "  He  that  hateth  his  brother  is  a 
murderer,"  for  "  hateth  any  man  the  thing  he  would 
not  kill  ?  "  He  taketh  a  life  who  taketh  that  which 
doth  sustain  the  life ;  "  and  ye  know  that  no  murderer 
hath  eternal  life  in  Him."  Because  all  life  is  so 
bound  up  together,  the  living  spirit  who  makes  a 
murderous  thrust  at  another  pierces  his  own  soul. 
Action  and  reaction  are  equal  and  in  opposite  direc- 


THE    OTHER    LIFE  207 

tions.  It  is  perillous  even  to  trip  up  one  of  the  little 
ones. 

"We  come  back  then  to  the  dictum  of  Jesus  that 
persistence  of  living  is  contingent  upon  a  certain 
mode  of  living.  As  St.  Paul  put  it,  "  he  that  soweth 
to  the  flesh  shall  of  the  flesh  reap  destruction ;  and  he 
that  soweth  to  the  spirit  shall  of  the  spirit  reap  life 
everlasting."  That  is  to  say,  continuity  of  existence 
is  dependent  upon  moral  achievement.  As  the  spirit 
is  the  suhstans  which  determines  the  form  of  the 
physical  body,  so  it  is  conceived  to  determine  the 
form  and  vitality  of  the  body  which  shall  be.  As 
every  act  of  self-consciousness  is  the  occasion  of 
complex  changes  in  the  molecules  of  the  natural 
body,  so  it  may  be  thought  that  concomitant 
changes  are  produced  in  the  spiritual  or  ethereal 
body  which  may  be  built  up  simultaneously.^ 

But  the  condition  of  the  forming  of  that  body  is  not 
what  the  champions  of  the  theological  doctrine  of  "  Con- 
ditional Immortality  "  have  supposed.  It  is  not  con- 
tingent upon  the  transfer  to  the  soul  of  any  magic 

'  It  will  be  noticed  that  this  way  of  thinking  is  substantially  that 
hesitatingly  put  forth  by  Stewart  and  Tate  in  "The  Unseen  Uni- 
verse. ' '  Mr.  John  Fiske  in  criticising  that  book  says,  that  * '  the 
weakness  of  their  theory  lies  in  the  fact  that  is  thoroughly  materialistic. ' ' 
It  is  materialistic,  but  in  this  I  conceive  its  strength  to  be.  Mr.  Fiske 
opposes  to  it  the  pseude  concept  of  a  life  of  pure  immortal  spirit.  It 
is  because  that  concept  is  practically  impossible  that  the  religious 
world  has  fallen  back  upon  the  gross  thought  of  "the  resurrection  of 
the  flesh."  It  has  thus  been  caught  upon  the  dilemma  of  either  be- 
lieving an  incredible  thing,  or  abandoning  altogether  the  belief  in  a  fu- 
ture life. 


268  THE    OTHER   LIFE 

"grace."  It  is  not  dependent  upon  Baptism.  It  is 
not  contingent  upon  act  of  so  called  "faith,"  The 
continuity  of  life  is  contingent  upon  the  actual  ex- 
istence of  life.  The  man  who  is  not  really  living  now 
cannot  possibly  live  hereafter.  Jesus'  assertion  would 
seem  to  be  sufficiently  explicit,  "except  a  man  be 
born  again  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God." 
He  is  not  forbidden  to  do  so,  but  he  cannot.  "  Except 
ye  eat  My  flesh  and  drink  My  blood  ye  have  no 
life  in  you  ; "  and  then  He  proceeds  at  once  to  say  that 
eating  His  flesh  is  "  doing  His  will."  But  what  was 
and  is  His  "  will "  ?  "What  other  than  the  irrefragable 
determination  of  the  whole  nature  toward  goodness  ? 
The  Christian  doctrine  is  that  every  man  is  in  very 
fact  the  architect  of  his  own  eternal  destiny.  There 
are  two  kinds  of  life  possible  to  every  man  who  has 
arisen  to  the  stage  of  moral  self-consciousness,  the  life 
to  the  flesh  and  the  life  to  the  spirit.  The  first  of 
these  two  modes  of  vital  energy  produces  the  physical 
body  which  is  conducted  within  what  we  know  as  the 
laws  of  matter.  The  second  carries  its  personality 
over  into  a  further  stage  whose  mode  can  only  be 
guessed  at,  or  constructed  out  of  analogies.  To  this 
end  the  flesh  is  impotent  it  is  the  spirit  that  quickeneth. 
One  might  say  that  the  spiritual  body  is  in  the  natural 
body  as  the  natural  body  in  the  womb.  At  a  certain 
stage  it  is  natural  for  it  to  be  "  quickened."  (1  John  v. 
21,  vi.  17,  viii.  11 ;  Eph.  xi.  5  ;  Col.  xi.  13.)  It  may 
fail  in  this  and  so  miscarry.     It  may  come  to  the  birth, 


THE   OTHER    LIFE  269 

and  then  perish  at  any  stage  before  maturity.  Bearing 
in  mind  the  two  well-known  facts,  firsts  that  no  human 
soul  can  exist  at  any  stage  without  a  body  ;  and  second^ 
that  being  born  does  not  give  any  guarantee  of  con- 
tinuing in  life,  and  with  the  light  which  Jesus'  career 
and  teaching  throw  upon  the  problem,  we  may  look 
steadfastly  toward  the  life  which  is  to  be.  It  is  the 
passage  from  one  kind  of  a  materially  conditioned 
state  to  another  state  similarly  conditioned.  What- 
ever significance  the  appearance  of  the  risen  Lord 
may  have  beside,  this  is  palpably  the  first  one.  It 
demonstrates  the  possibility  of  a  kind  of  human  life 
so  potent  and  tenacious  that  it  can  go  on  expressing  it- 
self in  a  body  after  it  has  passed  the  frontier  of  what 
we  know  as  matter.  ,.-^1 

How  is  such  a  passage  effected  ?  It  would  seem,  by 
all  analogy,  that  by  many  it  is  not  effected  at  all. 
Many  are  dead  while  they  live  and  they  must  surely 
remain  dead  when  they  die.  By  many  others  it  is  I 
probably  achieved  so  incompletely  that  they  pass  into 
the  next  stage  as  Richard  complained  that  he  had 
been  thrust  into  this,  "  scare  half  made  up."  It  is  at- 
tained by  those  in  whom  the  spirit  has  antecedently 
gathered  to  itself  a  form  built  up  of  some  substance 
which  can  be  the  physical  basis  of  the  next  one.  Prob- 
ably,  if  by  any  means  we  attain  to  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead  we  will  find  the  change  to  be  much  smaller  than 
we  imagine.  But  the  essential  mystery  must  be  the 
same    "  there "    as    "  here."     The     nexus    between 


270  THE    OTHER   LIFE 

psychical  and  physical  energy,  between  thought  and 
matter,  between  soul  and  body,  can  never  be  stated. 
For,  being  a  phenomenon  which  concerns  both  mind 
and  matter  it  can  never  be  stated  in  terms  of  either 
one.  The  sum  of  our  information  would  seem  then  to 
be  that  if  one  be  "  born  again "  and  if  the  spiritual 
body  which  such  birth  compels  be  sufficiently  devel- 
oped, it  passes  with  the  spirit  into  the  new  life  as  the 
natural  body  arrived  with  it  into  this  one.  The 
natural  life  is  the  period  of  gestation  for  the  spiritual 
life.  The  spiritual  body  is  in  embryo.  Where  it  is 
sufficiently  developed  to  perdure  the  shock  of  physical 
dissolution,  then  by  death  it  is  born  into  a  new  en- 
vironment. Of  course,  all  language  is  inadequate  in 
this  discussion.  But  the  metaphor  used  by  St.  Paul 
has  become  classic.  The  physical  body  is  the  seed 
which  encloses  a  germ.  It  must  die  and  unwind  its 
integuments.  From  it  the  spiritual  body  springs.  In 
any  case  the  seed  must  perish.  This  would  seem  to  be 
true  of  men  as  it  is  of  wheat  or  any  other  grain.  But 
whether  it  shall  arise  into  a  renewed  life  depends  upon 
its  own  vital  energy.  The  chrysalis  may  arise  a 
winged  and  decked  citizen  of  the  air,  it  may  dis- 
integrate in  a  silken  shroud  from  which  nothing  comes, 
or  it  may  emerge  a  puny  weakling  only  to  flutter  for 
a  little  while  in  its  new  home  before  it  perish  finally. 
This  is  the  second  death. 

For  all  this  Jesus  stands  ;  for  the  belief  that  each 
man  born  into  the  world  is  capable  of  being  born 


THE   OTHER   LIFE  271 

again ;  for  the  truth  that  the  new  bh'th  is  correlated 
with  moral  energy;  that  physical  death  is  only  an 
episode  in  the  career  of  such  a  twice-born  man ;  that 
the  hold  of  such  a  newborn  soul  upon  the  material 
universe  is  so  strong  as  to  bend  fit  matter  to  its  need 
at  every  stage  of  its  progress ;  of  all  this  Jesus  is  the 
revealer  and  the  instance. 

It  will  be  seen  that  there  is  no  room  in  this  concep- 
tion of  "  the  Life  of  the  world  to  come  "  for  either  the 
modern  Catholic  doctrine  of  Purgatory,  or  the  Protes- 
tant belief  that  the  article  of  death  fixes  indefeasibly 
the  destiny  of  every  man.^ 

1 1  am  aware  that  Anglicans  entertain  some  notion  concerning  an 
"Intermediate  State,"  but  the  contents  of  that  belief  is  so  obscure 
that  it  is  difficult  to  ascertain  with  precision  what  it  is. 


THE  HOLY  CATHOLIC  CHURCH 


XVI 

THE   HOLY   CATHOLIC   CHUECH 

The  Holy  Catholic  Church  is  an  article  of  faith  only 
and  not  a  demonstrable  fact.  The  only  reasonable  at- 
titude toward  it  is  the  same  as  that  toward  God,  the 
Incarnation,  the  Resurrection,  or  the  Future  Life. 
The  Holy  Catholic  Church  is  not  a  thing  which  has 
been  seen,  or  which  can  be  seen  now,  but  an  ideal  fact 
toward  which  Christ's  disciples  move  and  by  which 
they  are  moved.  The  Church  is  happily  defined  as 
"  the  blessed  company  of  all  faithful  people  ; "  but  in- 
asmuch as  there  have  never  been  any  people  altogether 
faithful  there  has  never  been  the  Church  of  which 
very  great  blessedness  could  be  predicated. 

It  is  not  uncommon  to  find  people  who  hold  this 
article  of  the  creed  in  quite  a  different  way  from  what 
they  do  the  others.  They  are  somewhat  shocked  and 
scandalized  when  they  are  reminded  that  the  Church 
is  a  belief  and  not  a  demonstrable  phenomenon.  They 
had  supposed  that  it  Avas  the  latter.  The  fact  that 
they  were  not  able  to  point  to  it  and  say — "  there  is 
the  Church  which  satisfies  the  definition,"  does  not 
disturb  them.  Such  Churchmen  have  the  curious 
power  to  personify  an  abstraction  in  the  religious 
sphere  as  similar  persons  liave  in  the  political  sphere. 

275 


2T6  THE   HOLY    CATHOLIC    CHUECH 

In  the  one  they  call  the  creation  of  their  fancy  The 
Church ;  in  the  other  they  call  it  The  State.  There  are 
many  persons  who  actually  believe  in  a  democracy 
who  still  speak  of  a  "  State  "  to  which,  in  their  opinion, 
many  of  the  ordinary  functions  of  society  should  be 
intrusted,  forgetting  that  they  themselves  are  the 
State.  In  like  manner  many  think  of  the  Church, 
To  it  they  attribute  the  qualities  of  holiness,  wisdom, 
purity,  and  other  transcendental  attributes,  forgetting 
that  they  themselves  are  the  Church. 

The  Church,  in  point  of  fact,  has  never  been  either 
one,  holy  or  catholic,  but  it  has  nevertheless  held 
within  it  these  ideals  as  goals  toward  which  it  has 
moved.  They  are  ideals  which  no  other  institution 
known  among  men  has  ever  seriously  set  before  itself. 
It  seems  clear  that  Jesus  proposed  to  convey  His 
influence  forward  in  time  and  outward  in  space  by 
means  of  an  organization.  His  favorite  phrase  was 
"  My  Kingdom."  It  is  quite  true  that  His  formula 
The  Kingdom  of  Heaven  was  His  expression  for  a 
regime  of  holiness.  It  meant  that  condition  of  human 
society  which  in  His  Way  of  living  should  be  uni- 
versally adopted.  But  it  seems  equally  plain  that  His 
hope  was  to  bring  in  the  universal  Kingdom  toward 
which  He  looked  by  first  setting  up  a  small  and  per- 
fect organization  into  which  could  be  gathered  those 
few  who  were  ready  to  begin  at  once  the  new  manner 
of  life.  He  proposed  that  the  little  flock  would 
gradually  expand  in  numbers,  and  grow  more  and  more 


THE   HOLY    CATHOLIC   CHURCH  277 

pure  in  quality,  until  it  should  absorb  and  assimilate 
the  race.  The  marks  or  "  notes  "  of  this  Society  were 
to  be,  unity  of  feeling  and  purpose,  purity  of  life  and 
thought,  and  complete  hospitality  for  all  who  were 
willing  to  adopt  this  Avay  of  life.  That  is  to  say,  it 
was  to  be  One,  Holy,  Catholic.  The  three  permanent 
institutions  which  He  Himself  established  within  the 
Society  corresponded  to  this  purpose.  The  Lord's 
Supper  is  the  symbol  of  unity  ;  Baptism  with  water  is 
the  symbol  of  holiness  ;  Preaching  is  the  symbol  and 
instrument  of  Catholicity. 

It  is  easy  to  see  that  He  proceeded  after  the  most  di- 
rect and  straightforward  manner  to  attain  this  end.  He 
surrounded  Himself  with  a  small  but  very  compact 
body  of  men  and  women  who  are  from  the  first  spoken 
of  as  His  disciples.  The  test  of  admission  which  He 
applied  was  the  most  rigorous  conceivable.  In  the 
language  of  the  Baptist,  He  winnowed  them  as  with  a 
fan.  "  If  ye  will  do  My  will "  was  His  test.  We  have 
already  examined  at  length  what  His  will  was.  This 
test  did  not  address  itself  to  an}'-  intellectual  or  social, 
or  even  to  any  conventionally  religious  qualities.  He 
did  not  attempt  any  hard  and  fast  delimitations  of 
His  Society.  He  was  content  to  let  any  one  join  it 
who  would.  But  He  set  free  a  force  within  it  whose 
potency  He  serenely  rested  upon  to  either  transform 
or  eject  every  one  who  came  within  its  influence. 
Sometimes  it  did  the  one,  sometimes  it  did  the  other. 
Of  one  man  it  is  accuratelv  stated  that  "  He  went  out 


278  THE   HOLY   CATHOLIC    CHURCH 

from  us  because  He  was  not  of  us,  for  if  He  had  been 
of  us  He  Avould  no  doubt  have  remained  with  us."  But 
the  Society  was  sufficiently  compact  and  its  frontier 
sufficiently  defined  from  the  beginning  for  the  pur- 
pose it  had  to  subserve.  The  history  of  the  Christian 
Church  is  a  strange  story,  not  so  much  on  account  of 
its  romantic  fortunes,  but  because  there  has  wrought 
within  it  and  upon  it  a  force  which  has  no  analogy  in 
any  other  organization.  It  is  not  surprising  that  Gib- 
bon misinterpreted  it.  Its  actual  existence  has  so 
little  corresponded  to  its  own  ideal,  while  at  the  same 
time,  it  has  held  so  tenaciously  to  its  ideal,  that  men 
have  been  puzzled.  It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  it 
began  not  as  it  would,  but  as  it  could.  The  material 
upon  which  the  ideal  began  its  work  was  most  un- 
promising. It  would  be  hard  to  conceive  of  a  pre- 
vious training  more  unsuited  to  their  ultimate  purpose 
than  was  that  of  the  Twelve.  All  their  habits  of 
thought,  all  their  prejudices  and  preconceptions,  all 
their  environment  were  unfavorable.  And  the  larger 
company  of  the  disciples  were  like  them.  Eeared  in 
Hebrew  exclusiveness  they  were  to  become  the 
apostles  of  humaneness.  Themselves  the  product  of  a 
religion  which  looked  chiefly  upon  ceremonial  purity, 
they  were  to  become  the  ensamples  of  ethical  holiness. 
Full  of  the  spirit  of  prejudice  and  caste  they  were  to 
be  the  champions  of  universality.  It  is  not  to  be 
wondered  at  that  they  fell  far  below  the  ideal  of 
Christ's  Society.     That  they  did  fall  far  short  of  it  is 


THE   HOLY    CATHOLIC    CHURCH  2Y9 

evident   to   any  who  reads  the  record  without  pre- 
judice. 

Both  probability  and  fact  warn  us  against  looking 
to  "The  Primitive  Church"  as  the  realization  of 
Christ's  ideal.  It  was  not  that,  and  it  is  evident  that 
He  did  not  expect  it  to  be.  The  Church  is  an  organ- 
ism and  follows  the  law  of  all  organisms.  Its  nor- 
mal type  is  to  be  sought  for  not  at  its  beginnings,  but 
after  it  has  had  time  and  opportunity  to  develop.  It 
is  because  men  have  thought  of  it  as  a  mechanical 
structure  that  they  have  so  largely  fallen  into  miscon- 
ception concerning  the  Early  Church.  But  the  thought 
of  our  day  is  becoming  biological  here  as  everywhere, 
and  replacing  the  mechanical  modes  which  have  pre- 
vailed. The  difference  between  an  organization  and  an 
organism  is  vital.  If  the  Church  were  an  artificially 
manufactured  structure  it  would  be  at  its  best  at  its  be- 
ginning. If  on  the  other  hand  it  be  a  living  organism 
its  perfection  of  existence  must  be  looked  for  after  it  has 
had  time  to  grow.  It  may  be  said  in  passing,  that  all 
questions  concerning  the  divine  right  of  Episcopacy  or 
of  the  Papacy  or  of  any  other  method  of  organization, 
or  concerning  the  mode  of  Baptism,  and  all  like  con- 
tentions, have  their  rationale  in  that  mechanical  con- 
ception of  the  Church  which  is  becoming  more  and 
more  powerless  to  hold  men's  thoughts.  Whenever 
the  Church  comes  to  be  conceived  of  as  living,  all  these 
questions  recede  or  take  an  altogether  different  form. 
Prescription  ceases  to  impress  with  a  sense  of  obliga- 


280  THE   HOLY    CATHOLIC    CHURCH 

tion.     We  become  easy  when  history  uncovers  defects 
which  would  otherwise  strain  our  faith.     The  actual 
present  condition  of  things  becomes  intelligible,  and 
our   hope   for   the  future  revives.     When  one  looks 
abroad  upon  the  Church  to-day  it  is  hard  to  discern  its 
unity.     In  fact  it  is  not  one.     Nor  can  one  candidly  say 
that  it  is  either  holy  or  catholic.     If   we  must  sup- 
pose that  at  any  point  in  its  history  it  has  been  all 
these,  then  we  must  say  that  it  has  ceased  so  to  be. 
And  with  that  conviction  dies  all  hope  for  its  future. 
For  a  living  organism  which  has  once  been  defeated 
in  its  purpose  of  life  dies.     And  it  is  never  resuscitated. 
If  the  Church  ever  displayed  the  note  of   Unity, 
when  was  it  ?    Certainly  not  in  the  Apostles'  time. 
"  One  said  I  am  of  Paul,  and  another  I  am  of  ApoUos, 
and  another  I  am  of   Cephas."     The  Jews  and  the 
Hellenists  were  at  odds  within  the  Church  from  the 
very  beginning.     Nor  was  it  about   trivial  matters 
they  disagreed ;  it  was  about  questions  which  touched 
the  very  fundamentals  of  the  Faith.     It  was  concern- 
ing the  essential  quality  of  human  nature,  as  between 
Paul   and   James.     It  was   about  the   catholicity  of 
Christianity,   as    between    Paul    and    Peter.      It    is 
seriously  to  be  questioned  whether  they  were  agreed 
as  to  the  nature  of  Christ  Himself.     Was  it  in  "  the 
period  of    the   Councils  "  ?— or  in  the  "  time  of  the 
Fathers  "  ?     I  have  read  the  Fathers,  both  post— and 
ante-Nicene.     At  one  time  I  thought  to  find  in  them 
a  picture  of    life  and  action  of    a  holy,  united   and 


THE   HOLY    CATHOLIC    CHURCH  2S1 

catholic  Churcli.  I  have  not  found  in  them  either 
unity  of  conception  concerning  tlie  Church,  or  con- 
spicuous holiness  of  thought,  or  any  real  idea  of  cath- 
olicity. I  know  that  wise  and  good  men  have  found 
all  these  things  there,  but  I  have  not  been  able  to  do 
so.  And  I  have  been  forced  to  the  thought  that  those 
who  have  found  these  notes  present  have  done  so 
because  they  have  .brought  them  with  them.  What 
Council  is  there  which  did  not  rise  out  of  antecedent 
lack  of  unity  as  its  occasion  ?  And  what  Council  can 
be  pointed  to  as  one  which  secured  unity  as  a  result 
of  its  deliberations  or  its  canons  ?  What  is  Nice  ? 
or  Chalcedom  ?  or  Constantinople  ?  or  Florence  ?  or 
Trent  ?  or  the  Vatican  ?  To  ask  these  questions  is  to 
answer  them  for  any  one  who  holds  by  facts  and  not 
by  theories.  At  no  point  in  her  career  has  the  Church 
been  able  to  give  anything  like  a  unanimous,  reply  to 
any  question  of  either  Doctrine  or  Discipline.  The 
dictum  of  Vincent  of  Lerins  "  Quod  semper,  quod 
ubique,  quod  ah  omnibus^''  is  the  most  impotent  of 
fetiches.  Of  course,  if  it  only  means  to  say  that 
everybody  is  wiser  than  anybody,  nobody  will  ques- 
tion it,  and  in  that  case  it  need  not  be  quoted  in  Latin, 
But  if  it  be  offered  as  a  practical  test  of  any  single 
dogma  or  custom,  there  is  not  one  which  can  endure 
it.  No  one  can  be  instanced  which  has  been  held 
"always,  everywhere,  and  by  everybody."  Even  at 
those  times  when  the  outward  organization  has  been 
most  powerful  and  when  a  large  unity  of  action  has 


282  THE   HOLY    CATHOLIC    CHURCH 

been  practiced,  there  have  been  flying  columns  which 
refused  to  march  with  the  main  bod}^,  and  declined  to 
take  their  orders  from  the  recognized  authority. 

And  all  that  has  been  said  concerning  the  note  of 
Unity  is  equally  true  as  to  the  notes  of  Holiness  and 
Catholicity.     They  have  never  been  exhibited. 

And  yet  I  believe  in  one,  holy.  Catholic  Church.  I 
believe  in  it.  If  it  were  a  matter  of  experience,  or  if 
it  were  demonstrable  by  any  process  it  would  not 
rightfully  have  a  place  in  the  creed.  One  does  not 
say  credo  of  things  about  which  he  can  say  scio.  But 
I  am  quite  aware  that  the  contents  of  my  belief  are 
not  the  same  as  that  of  many  of  my  brethren.  They, 
fondly  as  it  seems  to  me,  believe  in  a  perfect  Church 
which  has  been  and  is  lost ;  while  I  believe  in  one 
which  never  has  been,  but  surely  will  be.  My  faith 
looks  to  the  future,  not  to  the  past,  however  sacrosanct 
that  past  may  be  thought  to  have  been.  I^ot  that  I 
am  unmindful  of  the  past.  It  is  only  by  examining 
the  path  of  evolution  of  a  living  organism  that  one 
can  give  any -forecast  of  its  future.  The  history  of 
the  Church,  whether  written  in  the  Old  Testament  or 
in  the  New,  or  in  the  Fathers  or  Decrees  of  Councils, 
is  "  profitable  for  teaching,  for  reproof,  for  correc- 
tion, for  instruction  in  righteousness." 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


REC'D  LU-uHi 

'ID 

m     .'.7  2  4^969 

NOV  2  4 1969 


Form  L9-Series  444 


i 


PLEA^'t  DO   NOT    REMOVE 
THIS    BOOK  CARD£] 

^ILipRARYQ^ 


University  Research  Library 


•■^HERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILIT 

*'     00  606  715    1 

m 


o 


rJ       * 


i 


